www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.announce - DMD 0.157 release

reply Walter Bright <newshound digitalmars.com> writes:
Adds partial symbolic debug info support for Linux.

(Doesn't look like much, but it's a lot of code to support this!)

Doesn't yet do the internals of structs or classes.

http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
May 10 2006
next sibling parent "Ameer Armaly" <ameer_armaly hotmail.com> writes:
"Walter Bright" <newshound digitalmars.com> wrote in message 
news:e3tefc$1n5d$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 Adds partial symbolic debug info support for Linux.

 (Doesn't look like much, but it's a lot of code to support this!)

 Doesn't yet do the internals of structs or classes.


Nice!  I appreciate what you've done so far Walter, and can't wait to see it 
completed.

 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
May 10 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent pragma <pragma_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <e3tefc$1n5d$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Walter Bright says...

Adds partial symbolic debug info support for Linux.

(Doesn't look like much, but it's a lot of code to support this!)

Doesn't yet do the internals of structs or classes.

http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html


Nice!  This will make my development trips into LinuxLand a lot easier. Thanks!

- EricAnderton at yahoo
May 10 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Frank Benoit <keinfarbton nospam.xyz> writes:
Walter Bright schrieb:

 Adds partial symbolic debug info support for Linux.
 
 (Doesn't look like much, but it's a lot of code to support this!)
 
 Doesn't yet do the internals of structs or classes.
 
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html


Great.
Does this allready work with gdb? Or is additional work necessary for
the gdb-patches?
May 10 2006
parent Walter Bright <newshound digitalmars.com> writes:
Frank Benoit wrote:

 Great.
 Does this allready work with gdb? Or is additional work necessary for
 the gdb-patches?


Yes, it works already with gdb, though it works better with the D 
patched one.
May 10 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Thomas Kuehne <thomas-dloop kuehne.cn> writes:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Walter Bright schrieb am 2006-05-10:

 Adds partial symbolic debug info support for Linux.


While you are at it:
How about adding line number debug info for inline assembler code?

Thomas


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iD8DBQFEYuca3w+/yD4P9tIRAuGfAJ9gP6tb5s7gGDvjgboBvjITM3cx6QCdG+K4
9GwB+8k5h3Ffnhy7+fmOHjw=
=dXEA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
May 10 2006
parent reply Walter Bright <newshound digitalmars.com> writes:
Thomas Kuehne wrote:


 Walter Bright schrieb am 2006-05-10:

 Adds partial symbolic debug info support for Linux.


 
 While you are at it:
 How about adding line number debug info for inline assembler code?


I'll add it to the queue!
May 11 2006
parent Thomas Kuehne <thomas-dloop kuehne.cn> writes:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Walter Bright schrieb am 2006-05-11:

 Thomas Kuehne wrote:


 Walter Bright schrieb am 2006-05-10:

 Adds partial symbolic debug info support for Linux.


 
 While you are at it:
 How about adding line number debug info for inline assembler code?


 I'll add it to the queue!


Thanks


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iD8DBQFEY5E43w+/yD4P9tIRArpHAKCdwtuGrw1s4DQZFCzhehSjCnPB+ACfafyS
bWwPd2TKmVnwaW7HtPvwLrc=
=a+jh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
May 11 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent Dejan Lekic <dejan nu6.org> writes:
Awesome! Thank you!
May 11 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:
What happened to 0.156?

Stewart.

-- 
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCS/M d- s:-  C++  a->--- UB  P+ L E  W++  N+++ o K-  w++  O? M V? PS- 
PE- Y? PGP- t- 5? X? R b DI? D G e++++ h-- r-- !y
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox.  Please keep replies on 
the 'group where everyone may benefit.
May 11 2006
parent =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:
Stewart Gordon wrote:


 What happened to 0.156?


http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html#new0156

It fixed some printf's, that W had missed to comment.

--anders
May 11 2006
prev sibling parent reply John Demme <me teqdruid.com> writes:
Walter Bright wrote:


 Adds partial symbolic debug info support for Linux.
 
 (Doesn't look like much, but it's a lot of code to support this!)
 
 Doesn't yet do the internals of structs or classes.
 
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html


Thank you thank you thank you thank you.

Supporting struct and class internals would be great, but I guess we'll take
this some step at a time...

How about strings?  GDB seems to detect them as "unsigned long long"... 
Once you get struct internals working, you should probably make dynamic
arrays structs, but until then, why not make strings appear as char*?  They
should then work with GDB, since DMD puts a null character in them.

If there's anything that GDB doesn't quite support, but DWARF seems to, then
let me know... No promises, but I'll poke around GDB and (if sucessful) add
stuff to the patch.  It's very possible that there's stuff for dealing with
classes and such in DWARF and GDB, but won't currently work with GDB since
GDB treats D code like C code.  I can probably fix at least some of that.

~John Demme
May 11 2006
parent Walter Bright <newshound digitalmars.com> writes:
John Demme wrote:

 Thank you thank you thank you thank you.


You're welcome!


 Supporting struct and class internals would be great, but I guess we'll take
 this some step at a time...


Yes.


 How about strings?  GDB seems to detect them as "unsigned long long"... 
 Once you get struct internals working, you should probably make dynamic
 arrays structs, but until then, why not make strings appear as char*?  They
 should then work with GDB, since DMD puts a null character in them.


The trouble is that strings are arrays. Arrays are a 64 bit type. If dmd 
puts it out as a struct, then gdb wrongly assumes that it's returned 
like a struct, instead of in the EDX:EAX register pair. (windbg has the 
same problem)


 If there's anything that GDB doesn't quite support, but DWARF seems to, then
 let me know... No promises, but I'll poke around GDB and (if sucessful) add
 stuff to the patch.  It's very possible that there's stuff for dealing with
 classes and such in DWARF and GDB, but won't currently work with GDB since
 GDB treats D code like C code.  I can probably fix at least some of that.


The number one thing would be to support the D array type. A 
DW_TAG_dynamic_array_type would work.

The number two thing would be to support register variables in register 
pairs. Although you can specify that to codeview, there seems no way to 
do it in dwarf.
May 11 2006