Re: gdb can't handle a DIE with both sibling and children

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>]

On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 12:56:40PM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 12:36:15PM -0700, David Carlton wrote:
> > On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 14:20:49 -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com> said:
> > 
> > > It seems quite clear that the code above is deliberately only
> > > visiting children of DW_TAG_enumeration_type and DW_TAG_namespace,
> > > since those are the only things whose children it needs to visit.  I
> > > don't know why it was written that way, which does seem strange; I
> > > imagine it does a lot of useless recursing.
> > 
> > It's not written in the clearest fashion.  I have this cleaned up on
> > my branch to some extent, in a matter which, I hope, makes it clearer
> > that, normally, we always want to skip children (whether or not the
> > DIE happens to have a DW_AT_sibling attached to it): after all, most
> > of the information contained in children is information that we don't
> > need until a full symtab has been loaded.  My rewrite then forks off
> > the special cases for which we actually do want to look at children
> > into their own special functions; maybe H.J. could add one for
> > subprograms that looks for entry point tags.  (Assuming, of course,
> > that it really is important for the partial symbol table to know about
> > entry point tags, not just the full symbol table.)
> > 
> 
> I don't know for sure how DW_TAG_entry_point works. It seems to me
> that DW_TAG_entry_point should inherit DW_AT_accessibility and
> DW_AT_high_pc from its parent. 

Certainly not high_pc.  Its _bounds_ are the bounds of its parent; the
entry point is only specific PC that gets jumped to.

I don't know about DW_AT_accessibility.  You'd have to ask someone who
knows more about Fortran than I do.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer