This is the mail archive of the
elfutils-devel@sourceware.org
mailing list for the elfutils project.
Re: dwarflint versus linkage_name attributes
- From: Roland McGrath <roland at hack dot frob dot com>
- To: elfutils-devel at lists dot fedorahosted dot org
- Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2011 12:55:41 -0700
- Subject: Re: dwarflint versus linkage_name attributes
> Yes. And more importantly because the name of the constructor of the
> anonymous struct is the name of the naming typedef. [I now believe this
> is a bug, though.]
That can only be a default constructor, right? There is no way a user
could write a constructor for an anonymous class/struct.
> So this was breaking GDB because it wouldn't figure easily the
> relationship between the constructor (which name is, e.g, 't') and the
> anonymous struct which name is, well, anonymous. So adding the linkage
> name attribute [which value is 't'] was the easier way [from GDB's
> standpoint] to help fix the issue.
This is so that GDB can figure out how to call the constructor to evaluate
an expression that constructs an object of this type by performing an
inferior call?