+2002-05-10 Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com>
+
+ * dbxread.c (discarding_local_symbols_complaint): New complaint.
+ (process_one_symbol): Complain about discarding local symbols
+ due to a misplaced N_LBRAC entry.
+
2002-05-09 Elena Zannoni <ezannoni@redhat.com>
From Daniel Berlin <dan@cgsoftware.com>
struct complaint unclaimed_bincl_complaint =
{"N_BINCL %s not in entries for any file, at symtab pos %d", 0, 0};
+
+struct complaint discarding_local_symbols_complaint =
+{"misplaced N_LBRAC entry; discarding local symbols which have no enclosing block", 0, 0};
\f
/* find_text_range --- find start and end of loadable code sections
/* Can only use new->locals as local symbols here if we're in
gcc or on a machine that puts them before the lbrack. */
if (!VARIABLES_INSIDE_BLOCK (desc, processing_gcc_compilation))
- local_symbols = new->locals;
+ {
+ if (local_symbols != NULL)
+ {
+ /* GCC development snapshots from March to December of
+ 2000 would output N_LSYM entries after N_LBRAC
+ entries. As a consequence, these symbols are simply
+ discarded. Complain if this is the case. Note that
+ there are some compilers which legitimately put local
+ symbols within an LBRAC/RBRAC block; this complaint
+ might also help sort out problems in which
+ VARIABLES_INSIDE_BLOCK is incorrectly defined. */
+ complain (&discarding_local_symbols_complaint);
+ }
+ local_symbols = new->locals;
+ }
if (context_stack_depth
> !VARIABLES_INSIDE_BLOCK (desc, processing_gcc_compilation))