After finally fixing the performance leak last week, I started to work on another rather difficult problem.
It all started with a rather trivial bug report:
Miguel sent me a small moonlight application and said that the debugger would crash when trying to get a backtrace from within an event handler.
Sounded like a rather trivial problem, so I started debugging ....
Things turned out to be a lot more complicated - after spending a lot of time doing some research on inline methods and extensive reading of the dwarf spec, I found a huge design problem in the code which reads the line numbers from the dwarf debugging info.
In DWARF, line numbers are stored in a separete section of the symbol file and not in any way related to methods. The debugging information entry for a method (DW_TAG_subprogram) only contains a start and end address - but no information about where the line numbers for that method are stored. The line number table, on the other hand, only contains a mapping from addresses to line numbers and contains no information about methods. To make things worse, the line number table does not need to be continuous and there is no separation whatsoever between different methods.
This makes it rather complicated for the debugger to read line numbers. It looks like the old code only worked by accident since older versions of gcc always created a continuous line number table - g++ doesn't (I could even create a test case where g++ produces a non-continuous line number table where the test case doesn't contain any c++ features at all).
To make things work, I had to do some changes in the debugger: rather than having on LineNumberTable per Method, each Method now contains a reference to a LineNumberTable but it doesn't "own" that table (ie. it could be shared between different methods). I had to move a lot of code around for this; for instance, the LineNumberTable now longer contains the method's start and end row etc.
While working on this, I soon began to realized that a change like this would have been required anyways when supporting compiler generated code. From the debugger's point of view, the difference between an anonymous method (in C#) and an inline method (in native code) is not so big at all.
If everything works out fine, I should be able to finish the new dwarf code till the end of the week and then start to work on compiler-generated code on Monday.