[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Is `object' a "magic word" in DDD?

From: Steve Lamont
Subject: Is `object' a "magic word" in DDD?
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 11:25:29 -0700

I posted this a couple of weeks ago but got no reply -- I think the
mailing list may have been having some problems around then so I'm
taking the liberty of posting again:

I've noticed that if there is a field named `object' in a struct that
`ddd' does not properly display the struct.

For instance, in the simple program

#include <stdio.h>

typedef struct {
    char *object;
    int x;
} Thing;

int main( int argc, char **argv ) 

    Thing *t = ( Thing *) malloc( sizeof( Thing ) );
    int object = 42;
    Thing thang;

    t->object = "foo";
    thang.object = "bar";

    exit( 0 );



        graph display *t

(or the equivalent through the BUI) gives a small empty box in the
"Program Data" window.  Attempting to display the struct `thang' with

        graph display thang

produces a similar result.

Here's the version and configuration info:

> ddd --version
GNU DDD 3.3.11 (i686-pc-linux-gnu)
Copyright (C) 1995-1999 Technische Universit??ät Braunschweig, Germany.
Copyright (C) 1999-2001 Universit??ät Passau, Germany.
Copyright (C) 2001 Universit??ät des Saarlandes, Germany.
Copyright (C) 2001-2004 Free Software Foundation, Inc.

> gdb --version
GNU gdb Red Hat Linux (
Copyright 2004 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
GDB is free software, covered by the GNU General Public License, and you are
welcome to change it and/or distribute copies of it under certain conditions.
Type "show copying" to see the conditions.
There is absolutely no warranty for GDB.  Type "show warranty" for details.
This GDB was configured as "i386-redhat-linux-gnu".

>  ddd --check-configuration
Checking for X11 library directory... /usr/X11R6/lib/X11
Checking for XKeysymDB... /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/XKeysymDB
No configuration problems found.

> uname -a
Linux tirebiter 2.6.9-22.0.2.ELsmp #1 SMP Thu Jan 5 17:13:01 EST 2006 i686 i686 
i386 GNU/Linux

Is this broken or am I doing something wrong?



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]