import gdb-1999-08-02 snapshot

[deliverable/binutils-gdb.git] / gdb / symtab.c

diff --git a/gdb/symtab.c b/gdb/symtab.c
index b09ccae4ba56c35d5e65674ae5f2a1629d85d40b..2ade65fcb20d809adadcd60fa44724924a263f9b 100644 (file)
--- a/gdb/symtab.c
+++ b/gdb/symtab.c
@@ -1319,7 +1319,21 @@ lookup_block_symbol (block, name, namespace)
                 PC, then use the main symbol.
 
                 ?!? Is checking the current pc correct?  Is this routine
                 PC, then use the main symbol.
 
                 ?!? Is checking the current pc correct?  Is this routine

-                ever called to look up a symbol from another context?  */
+                ever called to look up a symbol from another context?
+
+                FIXME: No, it's not correct.  If someone sets a
+                conditional breakpoint at an address, then the
+                breakpoint's `struct expression' should refer to the
+                `struct symbol' appropriate for the breakpoint's
+                address, which may not be the PC.
+
+                Even if it were never called from another context,
+                it's totally bizarre for lookup_symbol's behavior to
+                depend on the value of the inferior's current PC.  We
+                should pass in the appropriate PC as well as the
+                block.  The interface to lookup_symbol should change
+                to require the caller to provide a PC.  */
+

              if (SYMBOL_ALIASES (sym))
                sym = find_active_alias (sym, read_pc ());
 
              if (SYMBOL_ALIASES (sym))
                sym = find_active_alias (sym, read_pc ());