Robert Clipsham wrote:
You'd be ok with, for example:
-g add symbolic debug info
-gc add symbolic debug info, pretend to be C++
Instead of C then? Or some other language that debuggers support? I say
this as C++ supports more of D's features, so we'd be able to give
better debugging info for debuggers without explicit D support.
Yes.
There was another point in that post, about the D extensions to DWARF...
I think it is unlikely that patches to support D's extensions to DWARF
would be accepted into gdb, particularly as the values for the DW_TAG's
conflicts with things in the DWARF4 spec. I think there should be a way
to act like D but without these extensions. Ideally the solution to this
is to try and get the extensions officially into the DWARF spec, which
I'd be willing to push for if possible.
That's the problem with D extensions; unless they get officially adopted they
conflict with future changes to the spec. We need to get them officially adopted.
