Re: C++ nested classes, namespaces, structs, and compound statements

[Daniel Berlin <dan at dberlin dot org>]

On Sat, 6 Apr 2002, Andrew Cagney wrote:

> > At the moment, GDB doesn't handle C++ namespaces or nested classes
> > very well.  I have a general idea of how we could address these
> > limitations, which I'd like to put up for shredding M-DEL discussion.
> > 
> > Let me admit up front that I don't really know C++, so I may be saying
> > stupid things.  Please set me straight if you notice something.
> > 
> > In C, structs are essentially lists of member names, types, and
> > locations (offsets from the structure's base address):
> > 
> >   struct S { int x; char y; struct T t; }
> > 
> > (Unions are just the same, except that the offsets are all zero.  That
> > relationship carries through the entire discussion here, so I'm not
> > going to talk about unions any more.)
> > 
> > If you think about it just right (or just wrong), this is really very
> > similar to the set of local variables associated with a compound
> > statement:
> 
> I'm very interested in hearing about what ACT did for Ada.  As far as I 
> know Ada, with its packages et.al. has a very similar problem and, 
> potentially, working code.
The last time I scanned the Ada changes (a few days ago), they hadn't 
handled this problem at all.

Probably because gcc doesn't produce module/packages/etc debug info for 
Ada.


--Dan
> 
> Andrew
>