This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch/rfc] mention C++ support in NEWS
- From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at elta dot co dot il>
- To: David Carlton <carlton at kealia dot com>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com,drow at mvista dot com
- Date: 17 Mar 2004 08:13:31 +0200
- Subject: Re: [patch/rfc] mention C++ support in NEWS
- References: <m3vfmdo534.fsf@coconut.kealia.com> <6654-Wed11Feb2004213143+0200-eliz@elta.co.il> <yf2y8q0z57x.fsf@hawaii.kealia.com>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at elta dot co dot il>
> From: David Carlton <carlton@kealia.com>
> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 16:29:06 -0800
>
> > IMHO, this text is okay, but perhaps it will sound much more useful if
> > you add some examples of situations where GDB previously didn't work,
> > and now does.
>
> That's a good point. How about:
>
> GDB's support for nested types and namespaces in C++ has been
> improved, especially if you use the DWARF 2 debugging format. (This
> is the default for recent versions of GCC on most platforms.)
> Specifically, if you have a class "Inner" defined within a class or
> namespace "Outer", then GDB realizes that the class's name is
> "Outer::Inner", not simply "Inner". This should greatly reduce the
> frequency of complaints about not finding RTTI symbols. In
> addition, if you are stopped at inside of a function defined within
> a namespace, GDB modifies its name lookup accordingly.
This is okay with me.
> I'm still not entirely thrilled with it, especially that last
> sentence; I don't want to go into _too_ many details, but I'm not sure
> I've found the right balance.
I think your text strikes the right balance, one that is appropriate
to NEWS.