[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
RE: [cdt-dev] Disassembly issues
|
Hi Aram,
The disassembly viewer supports the interleaved source
and disassembly, it's one of the main requirements. The source code for the
new disassembly is in the following packages:
org,eclipse.cdt.debug.core.disassembly
org,eclipse.cdt.debug.internal.core.disassembly
org,eclipse.cdt.debug.ui.disassembly
org,eclipse.cdt.debug.internal.ui.disassembly
Regards,
Mikhail
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 7:49 PM, Aram Antonyan <
aram.antonyan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
At 06:17 AM 4/22/2008, Mikhail Khodjaiants wrote:
Content-Class:
urn:content-classes:message
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C8A46A.753B0AE3"
Hi all,
To move
forward with the new disassembly implementation I need your feedback on
the following proposals and issues.
1.
Management of disassembly/source editors and source
lookup
The only way to open a disassembly
editor window is to use the "Open Disassembly" action from the Debug
view's context menu or from the "Source Not Found"
editor.
Once the disassembly editor is
opened for a disassembly context it becomes the default editor for all
elements that expose the same debug context.
There are two options on
how to manage the source editors in this case:
a. always try to open
the source editor in background if the source file is available
b. do
not try to open the source editor. In this case to open it user has to
close the disassembly editor and double click on the corresponding stack
frame.
In both cases we need to maintain the IP position in the source
editor if it is open, which means that we can not use the default
ISourceDisplay adapter provided by the platform
:(
Mikhail, I'd like to suggest a
third option. Introduce a context menu action in the new Disassembly editor
labeled "Show source" (or something to that effect). The action would close
the Disassembly editor and open the Source one. If that's not possible, I
would go with (b), but honestly, I'm not crazy about either alternative.
What if I want to see both Disassembly code and source code together? I
think showing only disassembly or source code is not good idea, at least it is
not useful. For instance if I see such assembler instructions
20A1C7AE A1
A4 45 B8 3D
mov eax,dword ptr
[_mrc_cmd_adm+0E4h (3DB845A4h)]
20A1C7B3 89 45
F0
mov dword ptr [ebp-10h],eax
20A1C7B6 8B 0D A0 45 B8 3D
mov ecx,dword ptr
[_mrc_cmd_adm+0E0h (3DB845A0h)]
20A1C7BC 89 4D
EC
mov dword ptr [ebp-14h],ecx
it is hard to understand what is going on here, but if I see source +
assembler like this
int a1 =
mrc_cmd_adm.subcommands[0].touch;
20A1C7AE A1 A4 45 B8 3D
mov eax,dword ptr
[_mrc_cmd_adm+0E4h (3DB845A4h)]
20A1C7B3 89 45
F0
mov dword ptr [ebp-10h],eax
int a2 = mrc_cmd_adm.subcommands[0].point_touch;
20A1C7B6 8B 0D A0 45 B8
3D mov ecx,dword ptr
[_mrc_cmd_adm+0E0h (3DB845A0h)]
20A1C7BC 89 4D
EC
mov dword ptr [ebp-14h],ecx
everything is clear!
This is my opinion :) By the way can you
tell me please Mikhail, where from I can get latest sources of existing
disassembler.
--
Best regards,
Aram.
--
Best regards,
Aram.
--
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.