Mail Archives: djgpp/1995/06/15/15:08:14
Matthew Biddulph (ball0079 AT sable DOT ox DOT ac DOT uk) wrote:
: In article <3rjnbt$lte AT mserv1 DOT dl DOT ac DOT uk>,
: I. Badcoe <mbbad AT s-crim1 DOT dl DOT ac DOT uk> wrote:
: >Matthew Biddulph (ball0079 AT sable DOT ox DOT ac DOT uk) wrote:
: [stuff about ladybug not seeing C++ symbols cut]
: >
: >: Can anyone suggest a debugger (or a fix) that will work?
: >
: >I also would like to be able to do this but cannot as yet.
: >
: >According to the gdb documentation, gdb can only correctly handle C++
: >correctly if the object modules are compiled in stabs (or maybe stabs+)
: >format. Unfortunately djgpp doesn't support stabs format.
: I've solved the problem now - it wasn't a problem with C++ at all,
: really - it's just that I had called my C++ program 'rotate.cpp',
: whereas unix-style programs like gcc expect 'rotate.cc'. So Ladybug
: was instructed by gcc to look for rotate.cc, and didn't find it. So I
: got no source code in my disassembly.
: However, as far as I can see, Ladybug doesn't specifically support
: C++, so it won't let you view class structures, etc. But its current
: functionality is enough for me for now.
Hmmm, well I never liked the look of Ladybug but perhaps its better in
a later version. The last version I saw showed me source, but didn't seem
to do any mapping of what instruction belonged to which source line.
In the mean-time does anybody have answers to my original questions:
(i) Will V2.0 support stabs format
(ii) If not, how difficult would it be for me to add it ?
Badders
- Raw text -