From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs Subject: Re: [22.1.90]: Point before start of properties Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 11:02:25 -0500 Message-ID: References: <6EE216E1AA959543A555C60FF34FB76702E48034@maileube01.misys.global.ad> <87wspcj0ou.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <6EE216E1AA959543A555C60FF34FB76702EED4A1@maileube01.misys.global.ad> <6EE216E1AA959543A555C60FF34FB76702EEDA6E@maileube01.misys.global.ad> <6EE216E1AA959543A555C60FF34FB7670300E86B@maileube01.misys.global.ad> <6EE216E1AA959543A555C60FF34FB7670305B82C@maileube01.misys.global.ad> <6EE216E1AA959543A555C60FF34FB7670305BF82@maileube01.misys.global.ad> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1203609832 29228 80.91.229.12 (21 Feb 2008 16:03:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 16:03:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org, Eli Zaretskii , Simon.Marshall@misys.com, cyd@stupidchicken.com To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 21 17:04:16 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JSDuA-0001Q8-Nw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 17:04:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JSDtf-0001Z2-P5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 11:03:43 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JSDtb-0001Wk-8S for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 11:03:39 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JSDtZ-0001Te-KF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 11:03:38 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JSDtZ-0001TU-HJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 11:03:37 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JSDtZ-0004b0-0R for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 11:03:37 -0500 Original-Received: from mx10.gnu.org ([199.232.76.166]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1JSDtY-0002fe-Rg for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 11:03:36 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JSDtV-0004Zl-Nf for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 11:03:36 -0500 Original-Received: from chene.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.20]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JSDtR-0004Xy-JF; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 11:03:29 -0500 Original-Received: from ceviche.home (vpn-132-204-232-204.acd.umontreal.ca [132.204.232.204]) by chene.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m1LG3SHu017667; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 11:03:28 -0500 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 8D2C4B41A8; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 11:02:25 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Thu, 21 Feb 2008 04:16:34 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Score: -2.5 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 2 Rules triggered BAYES_00=-2.5, HAS_X_HELO=0 X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:89833 gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs:21256 Archived-At: > So 20 years after GCC was a pioneer of the idea that it should be > possible to debug optimized code, we are back at printf debugging > because GCC developers no longer think it's important enough. > I am the one who made it possible to debug optimized code. > And I did it in a very simple way: I deleted the statement that > turned off -g when -O was enabled. > It's one thing to let people try to debug optimized code, > and quite another to go to great lengths to make it easier. > GCC has never done that. Debugging optimized code is an open research problem, fundamentally very difficult. Basically, it's an unsolvable problem, i.e. a wrong question. Stefan