[PD] gdb and Pd WAS: testtone comments

[Jonathan Wilkes]

So can I just use Valgrind with my current nightly build, or do I still need to recompile with the options Hans mentioned?

-Jonathan



----- Original Message -----
> From: Mathieu Bouchard <matju at artengine.ca>
> To: Ivica Ico Bukvic <ico at vt.edu>
> Cc: Jonathan Wilkes <jancsika at yahoo.com>; Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans at at.or.at>; pd-list <pd-list at iem.at>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 2:18 AM
> Subject: Re: [PD] gdb and Pd WAS:  testtone comments
> 
> Le 2011-11-15 à 22:03:00, Ivica Ico Bukvic a écrit :
> 
>>  I have not been following this thread at all, but for what it's worth 
> in my experience these kinds of seemingly illogical errors usually arise from 
> memory corruption (typically because something has not been properly allocated).
> 
> That's why I go on and on about Valgrind and its magical abilities to find 
> causes instead of consequences.
> 
> But I should also remark that code is easier to debug when it's not 
> optimised :
> 
>>  #1  0x000000000043c629 in pd_typedmess (x=0x830220, s=<optimized 
> out>,     argc=<optimized out>, argv=<optimized out>) at 
> m_class.c:812
> 
> as you can see, we're losing information, because the executable does stuff 
> in a way that gdb doesn't understand, and some info is missing about how gdb 
> could be reading it, when it's readable at all. Some variables disappear 
> entirely, some only pretend to.
> 
> But more importantly, some function calls disappear, either because they are 
> merged (due to any options named «inline»), or because it's faster to skip 
> doing certain things that are required for producing good backtraces 
> («omit-frame-pointer» also means some function calls become hidden).
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> | Mathieu BOUCHARD ----- téléphone : +1.514.383.3801 ----- Montréal, QC
>