Re: Bug Database?

[Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr>]

On 2006-10-20 11:19, Miles Bader <miles.bader@necel.com> wrote:
> Frank Schmitt <ich@frank-schmitt.net> writes:
> > Which results in the fact that gdb is since years completely unusable
> > for C++ programs relying on templated functions. 
> 
> Well, while I'll admit that the last I looked[*] the gdb internals were
> awful, unreadable, and barely maintainable code, this statement simply
> isn't true.
> 
> [*] Many years ago, so take this with a grain of salt.
> 
> I spend lots of time debugging heavily templated C++ code in gdb, and
> basically there are few problems (other than the canonical "optimized
> code can be confusing in the debugger" issues).  While debugging around
> templates requires a bit of knowledge about what's actually going on,
> it's no different than many other general debugging problems; you run
> into minor annoyances, and you quickly find ways around them.
> 
> > So most C++ developers I know have switched to the "free as in free
> > beer but not free as in free software" debugger from Sun Studio which
> > in contrast to gdb works really well.
> 
> I suspect this has more to do with the sort of developers you know than
> with gdb.

I am inclined to fully agree with this last statement.

I have had requests (and prepared a patch for the build process/system)
from colleagues in a couple of places (both my current work and earlier
ones), to build programs with the -xs flag of Sun Studio, so that they
can use gdb(1) instead of dbx(1).

What people prefer is, after all, uhm, a `preference' only :)