On Apr 8, 2013, at 11:30 AM, John McCall <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Apr 8, 2013, at 11:06 AM, Eric Christopher <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 10:40 AM, John McCall <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Apr 5, 2013, at 5:22 PM, Adrian Prantl <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Patch for review, mostly for the IRBuilder::DisableDebugLocations() part. >>>> >>>> Do not attach a debug location to code inserted by ARC -- >>>> it would create a spurious line table entry at the closing } of the scope. >>> >>> Is this a problem? Just that we don't want "next" to stop here? >> >> Pretty much. It's analogous to the same when we're looking at >> cleanups, etc. I think this is going into the realm of "opinions on >> behavior" here. > > Is 'next' driven completely by line table information, or is there some > way in DWARF to more explicitly say "this is a point that 'next' should > stop at"? The line table contains "is_stmt" flags to mark interesting locations where the debugger may stop. According to the DWARF standard it's not necessarily a source-language statement though. Function calls inside of expressions or the "," operator are probably good examples of where the debugger might stop even though its not technically a statement. -- Adrian _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
