Displaying 6 results from an estimated 6 matches for "gendisubprogram".
2010 Sep 06
2
[LLVMdev] More DIFactory questions - still stumped
...I'm not sure
I understand the first sentance ("You have to use the Subprogram type only
for the return type").
Here's what my code for creating function descriptors currently looks like
(note that some parts are commented out for debugging purposes):
DISubprogram CodeGenerator::genDISubprogram(const FunctionDefn * fn,
Function * f) {
DASSERT(fn != NULL);
// Look up in the map to see if already generated.
DISubprogram & sp = dbgSubprograms_[fn];
if (!sp.isSubprogram()) {
DIType dbgFuncType = genDIType(fn->functionType());
DASSERT(dbgFuncType.Verify());
DASSERT(d...
2010 Sep 07
0
[LLVMdev] More DIFactory questions - still stumped
On 6 September 2010 01:05, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote:
> DISubprogram CodeGenerator::genDISubprogram(const FunctionDefn * fn,
(...)
> false /* isDefinition */,
(...)
Hi Talin,
The only difference from what I'm doing is that I only export debug
symbols in definitions, not declarations. I may be doing wrong,
though, for multi-file compilation (haven't tested thoroughly).
>...
2010 Sep 07
2
[LLVMdev] More DIFactory questions - still stumped
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 1:56 AM, Renato Golin <rengolin at systemcall.org>wrote:
> On 6 September 2010 01:05, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote:
> > DISubprogram CodeGenerator::genDISubprogram(const FunctionDefn * fn,
> (...)
> > false /* isDefinition */,
> (...)
>
> Hi Talin,
>
> The only difference from what I'm doing is that I only export debug
> symbols in definitions, not declarations. I may be doing wrong,
> though, for multi-file compilati...
2010 Sep 07
0
[LLVMdev] More DIFactory questions - still stumped
...ow, this structure is invalid in your case.
-
Devang
On Sep 7, 2010, at 8:34 AM, Talin wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 1:56 AM, Renato Golin <rengolin at systemcall.org> wrote:
> On 6 September 2010 01:05, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote:
> > DISubprogram CodeGenerator::genDISubprogram(const FunctionDefn * fn,
> (...)
> > false /* isDefinition */,
> (...)
>
> Hi Talin,
>
> The only difference from what I'm doing is that I only export debug
> symbols in definitions, not declarations. I may be doing wrong,
> though, for multi-file compila...
2010 Sep 05
0
[LLVMdev] More DIFactory questions - still stumped
On 5 September 2010 19:32, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote:
> I've carefully studied the source code of CGDebugInfo in clang as a working
> example. One puzzlement is that there's a discrepancy between what the
> "source level debugging with LLVM" docs say and what clang does: According
> to the docs, DW_TAG_formal_parameter is used to specify a formal
2010 Sep 05
2
[LLVMdev] More DIFactory questions - still stumped
I hate to be a nag, but after several days of working on this I am still
utterly stumped.
Let me recap the situation as it currently stands: I'm trying to write code
that generates DWARF debugging information for my compiler using DIFactory
and friends. Unfortunately the information I am generating appears to be
invalid, but I can't figure out the cause.
Based on the advice in the