Walter,

Farmer brought this up and I was hoping you
could comment.

Farmer wrote:
>
> Why not ask Walter to further extend the amount of generated
> debug data?
>
> AFAIK, DMD generates line numbers and typeinfo for local or
> global variables.
> But it doesn't generate debug info for struct or class
> members and it uses the inappropriate type '__int64' for D arrays.
>
> I think, if DMD would generate debug info for structs and
> classes as DMC++ already does, debugging of D code would be
> *much* easier.
> Furthermore D arrays should not be tagged as type __int64,
> but as a C struct that represents the implementation of D
> arrays, like
> typedef struct {
>    unsigned int length;
>    void* ptr;
> } DArray;
>

You're right, of course. I do need to get this done.

"Frank Wills" <fdwills@sandarh.com> wrote in message news:bgvicd$2266$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Walter,
>
> Farmer brought this up and I was hoping you
> could comment.
>
> Farmer wrote:
>  >
>  > Why not ask Walter to further extend the amount of generated
>  > debug data?
>  >
>  > AFAIK, DMD generates line numbers and typeinfo for local or
>  > global variables.
>  > But it doesn't generate debug info for struct or class
>  > members and it uses the inappropriate type '__int64' for D arrays.
>  >
>  > I think, if DMD would generate debug info for structs and
>  > classes as DMC++ already does, debugging of D code would be
>  > *much* easier.
>  > Furthermore D arrays should not be tagged as type __int64,
>  > but as a C struct that represents the implementation of D
>  > arrays, like
>  > typedef struct {
>  >    unsigned int length;
>  >    void* ptr;
>  > } DArray;
>  >
>

Thanks very much. Your work on all of this
is sure very appreciated.

Walter wrote:
> You're right, of course. I do need to get this done.
> 
> "Frank Wills" <fdwills@sandarh.com> wrote in message
> news:bgvicd$2266$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> 
>>Walter,
>>
>>Farmer brought this up and I was hoping you
>>could comment.
>>
>>Farmer wrote:
>> >
>> > Why not ask Walter to further extend the amount of generated
>> > debug data?
>> >
>> > AFAIK, DMD generates line numbers and typeinfo for local or
>> > global variables.
>> > But it doesn't generate debug info for struct or class
>> > members and it uses the inappropriate type '__int64' for D arrays.
>> >
>> > I think, if DMD would generate debug info for structs and
>> > classes as DMC++ already does, debugging of D code would be
>> > *much* easier.
>> > Furthermore D arrays should not be tagged as type __int64,
>> > but as a C struct that represents the implementation of D
>> > arrays, like
>> > typedef struct {
>> >    unsigned int length;
>> >    void* ptr;
>> > } DArray;
>> >
>>
> 
>