... such as? Have I reinvented the wheel?
how is cdepend different from the existing cross-reference tools?
I don't parse the binary, but the assembly code. It's a text file. And the advantages are several:why did you find the need to read debug information from binaries, instead of using some tool that parses the source (e.g. finding an existing lex+yacc based tool that already parses the C code, and adding your own parts in it? what is (are?) the advantage(s?) of parsing the binary file?
1. Assembly code is so easy to parse.
2. Examining the code as compiled (including flags and command-line defines). But this is a disadvantage as well...
3. May work on other languages (g77?)
Yes. It would be a mess otherwise.
as for questions about the tool itself:
1. does it handle static functions?
Exactly. If you want to look for unused functions, you have to check the whole thing together. So yes, it's basically a `find sourcedir -name \*.S`. And yes, you get one directory with all files together. Which is quite comfortable, because the list of files is the list of functions, so it's easy to find a function by name.2. i guess you didn't yet handle sources scattered on several directories - of you just presume someone will feed _all_ the '.S' files together, and you'll generate one gigantic directory for _all_ the functions in the code?
3. i presume you cannot handle function pointers passed around the code?I will be able to tell that function A accessed the pointer to function C. But I can't tell who uses this pointer, that's right.
So Guy, please enlighten me: What other tool does the same?
Eli
-- Web: http://www.billauer.co.il
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- Haifa Linux Club Mailing List (http://www.haifux.org) To unsub send an empty message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
