On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 16:00:18 +0200, Jeff Law wrote: > But my assertion is that stuff like what you've shown above simply isn't > important to handle. What we need to look at are the common cases and I > haven't seen a strong argument that the common cases can't be handled by > gdb.
If we target only 99% of cases then sure GDB-side is enough. Still the GDB side will be more code and IMHO at an inappropriate place. I was tought + expect that in GNU world it does not matter where a feature is implemented, it is more important to be implemented at the right place. All the reasons have been already exchanged and I read between lines GCC still does not want to accept this feature so I will reimplement it in GDB only. Jan
