Mail Archives: djgpp/2001/06/25/08:30:06
On Sun, 24 Jun 2001 10:35:20 +0300 (IDT), Eli Zaretskii
<eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> sat on a tribble, which squeaked:
>Why do you insist speculating instead of stepping with a debugger into
>the code
In this case, I'd be stepping for hours with the debuggers that
actually seem to work at all.
>It doesn't matter; -gstabs+ is better even without optimizations, when
>you have tricky bugs like this one.
ISTR discussing this in connection with g++ a few months back, and the
conclusion was that stabs debugging info was theoretically better but
not available/broken/something else for some reason. Has this changed?
If it has, why is it not the default format with -g now?
>See above; this isn't hard evidence. Single-stepping the program
>under a debugger would be.
For whatever reason, FSDB and RHGDB don't seem to work on my system
and I don't appear to have plain GDB or any other debugger that will
work on DJGPP output. With the other misbehaving program, FSDB
wouldn't so much as run, AFAICT -- it died at startup with a segfault
without ever reaching its UI to let me single step anything, and RHGDB
just quietly exited without any error message or normal output (IMO
both of these indicate bugs in the respective programs -- anything
that segfaults is buggy regardless of if it only happens with
"pathological" user inputs, and anything that silently fails
likewise).
--
Bill Gates: "No computer will ever need more than 640K of RAM." -- 1980
"There's nobody getting rich writing software that I know of." -- 1980
"This antitrust thing will blow over." -- 1998
Combine neo, an underscore, and one thousand sixty-one to make my hotmail addy.
- Raw text -