On Thursday, August 22, 2002, at 04:34 PM, gdb-patches-digest-help@sources.redhat.com wrote:
The question is, is there a strong reason to change a behavior
that has been consistent for a very long time (even if undocumented).
Even if the ability to debug the prologue is un-important for most
users, it is important to some, and those users (GCC developers,
for instance) may be quite accustomed to the current behavior.
I am, for instance...
The varobj code will fail with file:line number breakpoint setting on the { that starts the function. This is, of course, not a problem for command-line gdb users, but varobj IS a part of gdb... Until we have the CFI stuff well enough set up that, on landing at the beginning of the prologue, the scanner will tell us where the stack frame WILL be when it has been set up so we can record this properly, this will be a problem.
Aren't varobj/MI and the CLI separate? varobj/MI could easily request a
prologue adjusted breakpoint without modifying the CLI.