[Issue 3389] gdb: using -gc is mandatory but not well documented

[d-bugmail at puremagic.com]

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3389


Leandro Lucarella <leandro.lucarella at sociomantic.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
         Resolution|FIXED                       |


--- Comment #3 from Leandro Lucarella <leandro.lucarella at sociomantic.com> 2012-02-01 02:25:52 PST ---
Copying comment in bug 4149 and reopening because I don't think this is really
closed.

In that bug some standard DWARF issues were moved to -g, and now I think -g
works with debuggers not supporting D extensions.

*BUT*, in bug 4149 Walter agreed about this comment by Brad Roberts:

> Depends on if gc implies c, c++, or 'as much as is supported in the built-in
> debug format without extension'. 
> 
> I'd argue for the last definition.  Given that dwarf supports it without
> extension, I'd argue that it should use it.  I'd argue that -g should be
> built-in + d extensions.

AFAIK this pull request works for -g instead of -gc, even when it uses standard
DWARF features, which goes against that comment.

Also there is the point made by Robert Clipsham in comment 1, which for me
makes a lot of sense. At least this will be more familiar with people used to
GCC command line arguments (which is probably 100% of the *nix world), where -g
is the default for debug and you have, for example -ggdb for GDB extensions.

AFAIK there is no clear direction about this and it would be nice to have one,
so the debugging stuff is as consistent as possible.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------