OpenE2K/gcc
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Projects Releases Wiki Activity
e5165811a8
gcc/libstdc++-v3/doc/html/manual/bk01pt12ch30s04.html
Benjamin Kosnik 4396e06315 evolution.xml: Update for 4.4 and 4.5 releases. 
2010-01-05  Benjamin Kosnik  <bkoz@redhat.com>

	* doc/xml/manual/evolution.xml: Update for 4.4 and 4.5 releases.
	* doc/html: Regenerate.

From-SVN: r155661
2010-01-05 20:51:05 +00:00

413 lines
31 KiB
HTML
Raw Blame History

This file contains invisible Unicode characters

This file contains invisible Unicode characters that are indistinguishable to humans but may be processed differently by a computer. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" /><title>Design</title><meta name="generator" content="DocBook XSL Stylesheets V1.75.2" /><meta name="keywords" content="&#10; C++&#10; , &#10; library&#10; , &#10; debug&#10; " /><meta name="keywords" content="&#10; ISO C++&#10; , &#10; library&#10; " /><link rel="home" href="../spine.html" title="The GNU C++ Library Documentation" /><link rel="up" href="debug_mode.html" title="Chapter 30. Debug Mode" /><link rel="prev" href="bk01pt12ch30s03.html" title="Using" /><link rel="next" href="parallel_mode.html" title="Chapter 31. Parallel Mode" /></head><body><div class="navheader"><table width="100%" summary="Navigation header"><tr><th colspan="3" align="center">Design</th></tr><tr><td width="20%" align="left"><a accesskey="p" href="bk01pt12ch30s03.html">Prev</a> </td><th width="60%" align="center">Chapter 30. Debug Mode</th><td width="20%" align="right"> <a accesskey="n" href="parallel_mode.html">Next</a></td></tr></table><hr /></div><div class="sect1" title="Design"><div class="titlepage"><div><div><h2 class="title" style="clear: both"><a id="manual.ext.debug_mode.design"></a>Design</h2></div></div></div><p>
</p><div class="sect2" title="Goals"><div class="titlepage"><div><div><h3 class="title"><a id="debug_mode.design.goals"></a>Goals</h3></div></div></div><p>
</p><p> The libstdc++ debug mode replaces unsafe (but efficient) standard
containers and iterators with semantically equivalent safe standard
containers and iterators to aid in debugging user programs. The
following goals directed the design of the libstdc++ debug mode:</p><div class="itemizedlist"><ul class="itemizedlist" type="disc"><li class="listitem"><p><span class="emphasis"><em>Correctness</em></span>: the libstdc++ debug mode must not change
the semantics of the standard library for all cases specified in
the ANSI/ISO C++ standard. The essence of this constraint is that
any valid C++ program should behave in the same manner regardless
of whether it is compiled with debug mode or release mode. In
particular, entities that are defined in namespace std in release
mode should remain defined in namespace std in debug mode, so that
legal specializations of namespace std entities will remain
valid. A program that is not valid C++ (e.g., invokes undefined
behavior) is not required to behave similarly, although the debug
mode will abort with a diagnostic when it detects undefined
behavior.</p></li><li class="listitem"><p><span class="emphasis"><em>Performance</em></span>: the additional of the libstdc++ debug mode
must not affect the performance of the library when it is compiled
in release mode. Performance of the libstdc++ debug mode is
secondary (and, in fact, will be worse than the release
mode).</p></li><li class="listitem"><p><span class="emphasis"><em>Usability</em></span>: the libstdc++ debug mode should be easy to
use. It should be easily incorporated into the user's development
environment (e.g., by requiring only a single new compiler switch)
and should produce reasonable diagnostics when it detects a
problem with the user program. Usability also involves detection
of errors when using the debug mode incorrectly, e.g., by linking
a release-compiled object against a debug-compiled object if in
fact the resulting program will not run correctly.</p></li><li class="listitem"><p><span class="emphasis"><em>Minimize recompilation</em></span>: While it is expected that
users recompile at least part of their program to use debug
mode, the amount of recompilation affects the
detect-compile-debug turnaround time. This indirectly affects the
usefulness of the debug mode, because debugging some applications
may require rebuilding a large amount of code, which may not be
feasible when the suspect code may be very localized. There are
several levels of conformance to this requirement, each with its
own usability and implementation characteristics. In general, the
higher-numbered conformance levels are more usable (i.e., require
less recompilation) but are more complicated to implement than
the lower-numbered conformance levels.
</p><div class="orderedlist"><ol class="orderedlist" type="1"><li class="listitem"><p><span class="emphasis"><em>Full recompilation</em></span>: The user must recompile his or
her entire application and all C++ libraries it depends on,
including the C++ standard library that ships with the
compiler. This must be done even if only a small part of the
program can use debugging features.</p></li><li class="listitem"><p><span class="emphasis"><em>Full user recompilation</em></span>: The user must recompile
his or her entire application and all C++ libraries it depends
on, but not the C++ standard library itself. This must be done
even if only a small part of the program can use debugging
features. This can be achieved given a full recompilation
system by compiling two versions of the standard library when
the compiler is installed and linking against the appropriate
one, e.g., a multilibs approach.</p></li><li class="listitem"><p><span class="emphasis"><em>Partial recompilation</em></span>: The user must recompile the
parts of his or her application and the C++ libraries it
depends on that will use the debugging facilities
directly. This means that any code that uses the debuggable
standard containers would need to be recompiled, but code
that does not use them (but may, for instance, use IOStreams)
would not have to be recompiled.</p></li><li class="listitem"><p><span class="emphasis"><em>Per-use recompilation</em></span>: The user must recompile the
parts of his or her application and the C++ libraries it
depends on where debugging should occur, and any other code
that interacts with those containers. This means that a set of
translation units that accesses a particular standard
container instance may either be compiled in release mode (no
checking) or debug mode (full checking), but must all be
compiled in the same way; a translation unit that does not see
that standard container instance need not be recompiled. This
also means that a translation unit <span class="emphasis"><em>A</em></span> that contains a
particular instantiation
(say, <code class="code">std::vector&lt;int&gt;</code>) compiled in release
mode can be linked against a translation unit <span class="emphasis"><em>B</em></span> that
contains the same instantiation compiled in debug mode (a
feature not present with partial recompilation). While this
behavior is technically a violation of the One Definition
Rule, this ability tends to be very important in
practice. The libstdc++ debug mode supports this level of
recompilation. </p></li><li class="listitem"><p><span class="emphasis"><em>Per-unit recompilation</em></span>: The user must only
recompile the translation units where checking should occur,
regardless of where debuggable standard containers are
used. This has also been dubbed "<code class="code">-g</code> mode",
because the <code class="code">-g</code> compiler switch works in this way,
emitting debugging information at a per--translation-unit
granularity. We believe that this level of recompilation is in
fact not possible if we intend to supply safe iterators, leave
the program semantics unchanged, and not regress in
performance under release mode because we cannot associate
extra information with an iterator (to form a safe iterator)
without either reserving that space in release mode
(performance regression) or allocating extra memory associated
with each iterator with <code class="code">new</code> (changes the program
semantics).</p></li></ol></div><p>
</p></li></ul></div></div><div class="sect2" title="Methods"><div class="titlepage"><div><div><h3 class="title"><a id="debug_mode.design.methods"></a>Methods</h3></div></div></div><p>
</p><p>This section provides an overall view of the design of the
libstdc++ debug mode and details the relationship between design
decisions and the stated design goals.</p><div class="sect3" title="The Wrapper Model"><div class="titlepage"><div><div><h4 class="title"><a id="debug_mode.design.methods.wrappers"></a>The Wrapper Model</h4></div></div></div><p>The libstdc++ debug mode uses a wrapper model where the
debugging versions of library components (e.g., iterators and
containers) form a layer on top of the release versions of the
library components. The debugging components first verify that the
operation is correct (aborting with a diagnostic if an error is
found) and will then forward to the underlying release-mode
container that will perform the actual work. This design decision
ensures that we cannot regress release-mode performance (because the
release-mode containers are left untouched) and partially
enables <a class="link" href="bk01pt12ch30s04.html#methods.coexistence.link" title="Link- and run-time coexistence of release- and debug-mode components">mixing debug and
release code</a> at link time, although that will not be
discussed at this time.</p><p>Two types of wrappers are used in the implementation of the debug
mode: container wrappers and iterator wrappers. The two types of
wrappers interact to maintain relationships between iterators and
their associated containers, which are necessary to detect certain
types of standard library usage errors such as dereferencing
past-the-end iterators or inserting into a container using an
iterator from a different container.</p><div class="sect4" title="Safe Iterators"><div class="titlepage"><div><div><h5 class="title"><a id="debug_mode.design.methods.safe_iter"></a>Safe Iterators</h5></div></div></div><p>Iterator wrappers provide a debugging layer over any iterator that
is attached to a particular container, and will manage the
information detailing the iterator's state (singular,
dereferenceable, etc.) and tracking the container to which the
iterator is attached. Because iterators have a well-defined, common
interface the iterator wrapper is implemented with the iterator
adaptor class template <code class="code">__gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator</code>,
which takes two template parameters:</p><div class="itemizedlist"><ul class="itemizedlist" type="disc"><li class="listitem"><p><code class="code">Iterator</code>: The underlying iterator type, which must
be either the <code class="code">iterator</code> or <code class="code">const_iterator</code>
typedef from the sequence type this iterator can reference.</p></li><li class="listitem"><p><code class="code">Sequence</code>: The type of sequence that this iterator
references. This sequence must be a safe sequence (discussed below)
whose <code class="code">iterator</code> or <code class="code">const_iterator</code> typedef
is the type of the safe iterator.</p></li></ul></div></div><div class="sect4" title="Safe Sequences (Containers)"><div class="titlepage"><div><div><h5 class="title"><a id="debug_mode.design.methods.safe_seq"></a>Safe Sequences (Containers)</h5></div></div></div><p>Container wrappers provide a debugging layer over a particular
container type. Because containers vary greatly in the member
functions they support and the semantics of those member functions
(especially in the area of iterator invalidation), container
wrappers are tailored to the container they reference, e.g., the
debugging version of <code class="code">std::list</code> duplicates the entire
interface of <code class="code">std::list</code>, adding additional semantic
checks and then forwarding operations to the
real <code class="code">std::list</code> (a public base class of the debugging
version) as appropriate. However, all safe containers inherit from
the class template <code class="code">__gnu_debug::_Safe_sequence</code>,
instantiated with the type of the safe container itself (an instance
of the curiously recurring template pattern).</p><p>The iterators of a container wrapper will be
<a class="link" href="bk01pt12ch30s04.html#debug_mode.design.methods.safe_iter" title="Safe Iterators">safe
iterators</a> that reference sequences of this type and wrap the
iterators provided by the release-mode base class. The debugging
container will use only the safe iterators within its own interface
(therefore requiring the user to use safe iterators, although this
does not change correct user code) and will communicate with the
release-mode base class with only the underlying, unsafe,
release-mode iterators that the base class exports.</p><p> The debugging version of <code class="code">std::list</code> will have the
following basic structure:</p><pre class="programlisting">
template&lt;typename _Tp, typename _Allocator = allocator&lt;_Tp&gt;
class debug-list :
public release-list&lt;_Tp, _Allocator&gt;,
public __gnu_debug::_Safe_sequence&lt;debug-list&lt;_Tp, _Allocator&gt; &gt;
{
typedef release-list&lt;_Tp, _Allocator&gt; _Base;
typedef debug-list&lt;_Tp, _Allocator&gt; _Self;
public:
typedef __gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator&lt;typename _Base::iterator, _Self&gt; iterator;
typedef __gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator&lt;typename _Base::const_iterator, _Self&gt; const_iterator;
// duplicate std::list interface with debugging semantics
};
</pre></div></div><div class="sect3" title="Precondition Checking"><div class="titlepage"><div><div><h4 class="title"><a id="debug_mode.design.methods.precond"></a>Precondition Checking</h4></div></div></div><p>The debug mode operates primarily by checking the preconditions of
all standard library operations that it supports. Preconditions that
are always checked (regardless of whether or not we are in debug
mode) are checked via the <code class="code">__check_xxx</code> macros defined
and documented in the source
file <code class="code">include/debug/debug.h</code>. Preconditions that may or
may not be checked, depending on the debug-mode
macro <code class="code">_GLIBCXX_DEBUG</code>, are checked via
the <code class="code">__requires_xxx</code> macros defined and documented in the
same source file. Preconditions are validated using any additional
information available at run-time, e.g., the containers that are
associated with a particular iterator, the position of the iterator
within those containers, the distance between two iterators that may
form a valid range, etc. In the absence of suitable information,
e.g., an input iterator that is not a safe iterator, these
precondition checks will silently succeed.</p><p>The majority of precondition checks use the aforementioned macros,
which have the secondary benefit of having prewritten debug
messages that use information about the current status of the
objects involved (e.g., whether an iterator is singular or what
sequence it is attached to) along with some static information
(e.g., the names of the function parameters corresponding to the
objects involved). When not using these macros, the debug mode uses
either the debug-mode assertion
macro <code class="code">_GLIBCXX_DEBUG_ASSERT</code> , its pedantic
cousin <code class="code">_GLIBCXX_DEBUG_PEDASSERT</code>, or the assertion
check macro that supports more advance formulation of error
messages, <code class="code">_GLIBCXX_DEBUG_VERIFY</code>. These macros are
documented more thoroughly in the debug mode source code.</p></div><div class="sect3" title="Release- and debug-mode coexistence"><div class="titlepage"><div><div><h4 class="title"><a id="debug_mode.design.methods.coexistence"></a>Release- and debug-mode coexistence</h4></div></div></div><p>The libstdc++ debug mode is the first debug mode we know of that
is able to provide the "Per-use recompilation" (4) guarantee, that
allows release-compiled and debug-compiled code to be linked and
executed together without causing unpredictable behavior. This
guarantee minimizes the recompilation that users are required to
perform, shortening the detect-compile-debug bug hunting cycle
and making the debug mode easier to incorporate into development
environments by minimizing dependencies.</p><p>Achieving link- and run-time coexistence is not a trivial
implementation task. To achieve this goal we required a small
extension to the GNU C++ compiler (since incorporated into the C++0x language specification, described in the GCC Manual for the C++ language as
<a class="ulink" href="http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Namespace-Association.html#Namespace-Association" target="_top">namespace
association</a>), and a complex organization of debug- and
release-modes. The end result is that we have achieved per-use
recompilation but have had to give up some checking of the
<code class="code">std::basic_string</code> class template (namely, safe
iterators).
</p><div class="sect4" title="Compile-time coexistence of release- and debug-mode components"><div class="titlepage"><div><div><h5 class="title"><a id="methods.coexistence.compile"></a>Compile-time coexistence of release- and debug-mode components</h5></div></div></div><p>Both the release-mode components and the debug-mode
components need to exist within a single translation unit so that
the debug versions can wrap the release versions. However, only one
of these components should be user-visible at any particular
time with the standard name, e.g., <code class="code">std::list</code>. </p><p>In release mode, we define only the release-mode version of the
component with its standard name and do not include the debugging
component at all. The release mode version is defined within the
namespace <code class="code">std</code>. Minus the namespace associations, this
method leaves the behavior of release mode completely unchanged from
its behavior prior to the introduction of the libstdc++ debug
mode. Here's an example of what this ends up looking like, in
C++.</p><pre class="programlisting">
namespace std
{
template&lt;typename _Tp, typename _Alloc = allocator&lt;_Tp&gt; &gt;
class list
{
// ...
};
} // namespace std
</pre><p>In debug mode we include the release-mode container (which is now
defined in in the namespace <code class="code">__norm</code>) and also the
debug-mode container. The debug-mode container is defined within the
namespace <code class="code">__debug</code>, which is associated with namespace
<code class="code">std</code> via the C++0x namespace association language feature. This
method allows the debug and release versions of the same component to
coexist at compile-time and link-time without causing an unreasonable
maintenance burden, while minimizing confusion. Again, this boils down
to C++ code as follows:</p><pre class="programlisting">
namespace std
{
namespace __norm
{
template&lt;typename _Tp, typename _Alloc = allocator&lt;_Tp&gt; &gt;
class list
{
// ...
};
} // namespace __gnu_norm
namespace __debug
{
template&lt;typename _Tp, typename _Alloc = allocator&lt;_Tp&gt; &gt;
class list
: public __norm::list&lt;_Tp, _Alloc&gt;,
public __gnu_debug::_Safe_sequence&lt;list&lt;_Tp, _Alloc&gt; &gt;
{
// ...
};
} // namespace __norm
// namespace __debug __attribute__ ((strong));
inline namespace __debug { }
}
</pre></div><div class="sect4" title="Link- and run-time coexistence of release- and debug-mode components"><div class="titlepage"><div><div><h5 class="title"><a id="methods.coexistence.link"></a>Link- and run-time coexistence of release- and
debug-mode components</h5></div></div></div><p>Because each component has a distinct and separate release and
debug implementation, there are are no issues with link-time
coexistence: the separate namespaces result in different mangled
names, and thus unique linkage.</p><p>However, components that are defined and used within the C++
standard library itself face additional constraints. For instance,
some of the member functions of <code class="code"> std::moneypunct</code> return
<code class="code">std::basic_string</code>. Normally, this is not a problem, but
with a mixed mode standard library that could be using either
debug-mode or release-mode <code class="code"> basic_string</code> objects, things
get more complicated. As the return value of a function is not
encoded into the mangled name, there is no way to specify a
release-mode or a debug-mode string. In practice, this results in
runtime errors. A simplified example of this problem is as follows.
</p><p> Take this translation unit, compiled in debug-mode: </p><pre class="programlisting">
// -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG
#include &lt;string&gt;
std::string test02();
std::string test01()
{
return test02();
}
int main()
{
test01();
return 0;
}
</pre><p> ... and linked to this translation unit, compiled in release mode:</p><pre class="programlisting">
#include &lt;string&gt;
std::string
test02()
{
return std::string("toast");
}
</pre><p> For this reason we cannot easily provide safe iterators for
the <code class="code">std::basic_string</code> class template, as it is present
throughout the C++ standard library. For instance, locale facets
define typedefs that include <code class="code">basic_string</code>: in a mixed
debug/release program, should that typedef be based on the
debug-mode <code class="code">basic_string</code> or the
release-mode <code class="code">basic_string</code>? While the answer could be
"both", and the difference hidden via renaming a la the
debug/release containers, we must note two things about locale
facets:</p><div class="orderedlist"><ol class="orderedlist" type="1"><li class="listitem"><p>They exist as shared state: one can create a facet in one
translation unit and access the facet via the same type name in a
different translation unit. This means that we cannot have two
different versions of locale facets, because the types would not be
the same across debug/release-mode translation unit barriers.</p></li><li class="listitem"><p>They have virtual functions returning strings: these functions
mangle in the same way regardless of the mangling of their return
types (see above), and their precise signatures can be relied upon
by users because they may be overridden in derived classes.</p></li></ol></div><p>With the design of libstdc++ debug mode, we cannot effectively hide
the differences between debug and release-mode strings from the
user. Failure to hide the differences may result in unpredictable
behavior, and for this reason we have opted to only
perform <code class="code">basic_string</code> changes that do not require ABI
changes. The effect on users is expected to be minimal, as there are
simple alternatives (e.g., <code class="code">__gnu_debug::basic_string</code>),
and the usability benefit we gain from the ability to mix debug- and
release-compiled translation units is enormous.</p></div><div class="sect4" title="Alternatives for Coexistence"><div class="titlepage"><div><div><h5 class="title"><a id="methods.coexistence.alt"></a>Alternatives for Coexistence</h5></div></div></div><p>The coexistence scheme above was chosen over many alternatives,
including language-only solutions and solutions that also required
extensions to the C++ front end. The following is a partial list of
solutions, with justifications for our rejection of each.</p><div class="itemizedlist"><ul class="itemizedlist" type="disc"><li class="listitem"><p><span class="emphasis"><em>Completely separate debug/release libraries</em></span>: This is by
far the simplest implementation option, where we do not allow any
coexistence of debug- and release-compiled translation units in a
program. This solution has an extreme negative affect on usability,
because it is quite likely that some libraries an application
depends on cannot be recompiled easily. This would not meet
our <span class="emphasis"><em>usability</em></span> or <span class="emphasis"><em>minimize recompilation</em></span> criteria
well.</p></li><li class="listitem"><p><span class="emphasis"><em>Add a <code class="code">Debug</code> boolean template parameter</em></span>:
Partial specialization could be used to select the debug
implementation when <code class="code">Debug == true</code>, and the state
of <code class="code">_GLIBCXX_DEBUG</code> could decide whether the
default <code class="code">Debug</code> argument is <code class="code">true</code>
or <code class="code">false</code>. This option would break conformance with the
C++ standard in both debug <span class="emphasis"><em>and</em></span> release modes. This would
not meet our <span class="emphasis"><em>correctness</em></span> criteria. </p></li><li class="listitem"><p><span class="emphasis"><em>Packaging a debug flag in the allocators</em></span>: We could
reuse the <code class="code">Allocator</code> template parameter of containers
by adding a sentinel wrapper <code class="code">debug&lt;&gt;</code> that
signals the user's intention to use debugging, and pick up
the <code class="code">debug&lt;&gt;</code> allocator wrapper in a partial
specialization. However, this has two drawbacks: first, there is a
conformance issue because the default allocator would not be the
standard-specified <code class="code">std::allocator&lt;T&gt;</code>. Secondly
(and more importantly), users that specify allocators instead of
implicitly using the default allocator would not get debugging
containers. Thus this solution fails the <span class="emphasis"><em>correctness</em></span>
criteria.</p></li><li class="listitem"><p><span class="emphasis"><em>Define debug containers in another namespace, and employ
a <code class="code">using</code> declaration (or directive)</em></span>: This is an
enticing option, because it would eliminate the need for
the <code class="code">link_name</code> extension by aliasing the
templates. However, there is no true template aliasing mechanism
is C++, because both <code class="code">using</code> directives and using
declarations disallow specialization. This method fails
the <span class="emphasis"><em>correctness</em></span> criteria.</p></li><li class="listitem"><p><span class="emphasis"><em> Use implementation-specific properties of anonymous
namespaces. </em></span>
See <a class="ulink" href="http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2003-08/msg00004.html" target="_top"> this post
</a>
This method fails the <span class="emphasis"><em>correctness</em></span> criteria.</p></li><li class="listitem"><p><span class="emphasis"><em>Extension: allow reopening on namespaces</em></span>: This would
allow the debug mode to effectively alias the
namespace <code class="code">std</code> to an internal namespace, such
as <code class="code">__gnu_std_debug</code>, so that it is completely
separate from the release-mode <code class="code">std</code> namespace. While
this will solve some renaming problems and ensure that
debug- and release-compiled code cannot be mixed unsafely, it ensures that
debug- and release-compiled code cannot be mixed at all. For
instance, the program would have two <code class="code">std::cout</code>
objects! This solution would fails the <span class="emphasis"><em>minimize
recompilation</em></span> requirement, because we would only be able to
support option (1) or (2).</p></li><li class="listitem"><p><span class="emphasis"><em>Extension: use link name</em></span>: This option involves
complicated re-naming between debug-mode and release-mode
components at compile time, and then a g++ extension called <span class="emphasis"><em>
link name </em></span> to recover the original names at link time. There
are two drawbacks to this approach. One, it's very verbose,
relying on macro renaming at compile time and several levels of
include ordering. Two, ODR issues remained with container member
functions taking no arguments in mixed-mode settings resulting in
equivalent link names, <code class="code"> vector::push_back() </code> being
one example.
See <a class="ulink" href="http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2003-08/msg00177.html" target="_top">link
name</a> </p></li></ul></div><p>Other options may exist for implementing the debug mode, many of
which have probably been considered and others that may still be
lurking. This list may be expanded over time to include other
options that we could have implemented, but in all cases the full
ramifications of the approach (as measured against the design goals
for a libstdc++ debug mode) should be considered first. The DejaGNU
testsuite includes some testcases that check for known problems with
some solutions (e.g., the <code class="code">using</code> declaration solution
that breaks user specialization), and additional testcases will be
added as we are able to identify other typical problem cases. These
test cases will serve as a benchmark by which we can compare debug
mode implementations.</p></div></div></div><div class="sect2" title="Other Implementations"><div class="titlepage"><div><div><h3 class="title"><a id="debug_mode.design.other"></a>Other Implementations</h3></div></div></div><p>
</p><p> There are several existing implementations of debug modes for C++
standard library implementations, although none of them directly
supports debugging for programs using libstdc++. The existing
implementations include:</p><div class="itemizedlist"><ul class="itemizedlist" type="disc"><li class="listitem"><p><a class="ulink" href="http://www.mathcs.sjsu.edu/faculty/horstman/safestl.html" target="_top">SafeSTL</a>:
SafeSTL was the original debugging version of the Standard Template
Library (STL), implemented by Cay S. Horstmann on top of the
Hewlett-Packard STL. Though it inspired much work in this area, it
has not been kept up-to-date for use with modern compilers or C++
standard library implementations.</p></li><li class="listitem"><p><a class="ulink" href="http://www.stlport.org/" target="_top">STLport</a>: STLport is a free
implementation of the C++ standard library derived from the <a class="ulink" href="http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/" target="_top">SGI implementation</a>, and
ported to many other platforms. It includes a debug mode that uses a
wrapper model (that in some ways inspired the libstdc++ debug mode
design), although at the time of this writing the debug mode is
somewhat incomplete and meets only the "Full user recompilation" (2)
recompilation guarantee by requiring the user to link against a
different library in debug mode vs. release mode.</p></li><li class="listitem"><p>Metrowerks CodeWarrior: The C++ standard library
that ships with Metrowerks CodeWarrior includes a debug mode. It is
a full debug-mode implementation (including debugging for
CodeWarrior extensions) and is easy to use, although it meets only
the "Full recompilation" (1) recompilation
guarantee.</p></li></ul></div></div></div><div class="navfooter"><hr /><table width="100%" summary="Navigation footer"><tr><td width="40%" align="left"><a accesskey="p" href="bk01pt12ch30s03.html">Prev</a> </td><td width="20%" align="center"><a accesskey="u" href="debug_mode.html">Up</a></td><td width="40%" align="right"> <a accesskey="n" href="parallel_mode.html">Next</a></td></tr><tr><td width="40%" align="left" valign="top">Using </td><td width="20%" align="center"><a accesskey="h" href="../spine.html">Home</a></td><td width="40%" align="right" valign="top"> Chapter 31. Parallel Mode</td></tr></table></div></body></html>
Reference in New Issue View Git Blame Copy Permalink