Board index » cppbuilder » Multiple line #0 in LINN32's?

Multiple line #0 in LINN32's?


2007-01-26 04:05:15 AM
cppbuilder107
The LINN32 was generated with 2006 architect trial. Its ***NOT*** a TDUMP
bug, my OMF post processing utility sees the same thing. The duplicate
entries for a line #0 in an OBJ are in themself harmless, but I have some
concern about what might be going on inside the backend that caused them to
be generated. The older BC5 was only producing a single entry for line #0.
As a suggestion, there's no reason to be wasting space on 32 bit offsets in
a LINN32 when all the entries in a line number record are less than 65536
(which is the vast majority of cases). Emitting a LINNUM with 16 bit
offsets would save 2 bytes per entry.
TDUMP output
-------------------------------------------------------------
0005E7 SEGDEF 1 : _TEXT DWORD PUBLIC USE32 Class 'CODE' Length:
115b
blah, blah, blah...
005746 LINN32 Segment: _TEXT
764:00001001h 769:00001006h 770:00001032h 773:00001038h
775:0000103Eh
789:00001049h 790:0000104Fh 793:00001051h 799:0000105Ch
801:00001065h
803:00001080h 804:0000109Ch 809:000010A4h 810:000010ABh
814:000010C0h
815:000010C9h 818:000010D0h 819:000010E4h 822:000010E9h
823:000010EFh
811:00001101h 826:0000110Ah 827:00001113h 829:0000111Fh
831:00001128h
832:00001131h 834:0000114Ah 835:0000114Ch 0:00001150h
839:00001150h
841:00001153h 842:00001159h --->0:0000115Bh 0:0000115Bh
<----
005818 MODE32
My post processing tool's output
-------------------------------------------------------------
0005E7 SEGDEF 1 : _TEXT DWORD PUBLIC USE32 Class:'CODE'
(OvlIx==0) Len:115B
*** WARNING *** The SEGDEF record above has problem(s).
Overlay Index value of zero is illegal
blah, blah, blah...
005756 LINN32 _TEXT
0764:00001001H 0769:00001006H 0770:00001032H 0773:00001038H
0775:0000103EH 0789:00001049H 0790:0000104FH 0793:00001051H
0799:0000105CH 0801:00001065H 0803:00001080H 0804:0000109CH
0809:000010A4H 0810:000010ABH 0814:000010C0H 0815:000010C9H
0818:000010D0H 0819:000010E4H 0822:000010E9H 0823:000010EFH
0811:00001101H 0826:0000110AH 0827:00001113H 0829:0000111FH
0831:00001128H 0832:00001131H 0834:0000114AH 0835:0000114CH
0000:00001150H 0839:00001150H 0841:00001153H 0842:00001159H
--->0000:0000115BH 0000:0000115BH <---
 
 

Re:Multiple line #0 in LINN32's?

Lets suppose for a moment this isn't a bug and/or you have no intention of
doing anything about it if it was a bug.
Q: Will removing the redundant 2nd line number for zero cause anything dire
to happen in the de{*word*81}/profiler/etc tools downstream.
If Borland has no intentions of dealing with this, I will rectify it within
the line number optimization phase in my OMF post processor product.
< XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
The LINN32 was generated with 2006 architect trial. Its ***NOT*** a TDUMP
bug, my OMF post processing utility sees the same thing. The duplicate
entries for a line #0 in an OBJ are in themself harmless, but I have some
concern about what might be going on inside the backend that caused them
to
be generated.
 

Re:Multiple line #0 in LINN32's?

XXXX@XXXXX.COM wrote:
Quote
Q: Will removing the redundant 2nd line number for zero cause
anything dire to happen in the de{*word*81}/profiler/etc tools
downstream.
It shouldn't be needed anywhere.
Quote
If Borland has no intentions of dealing with this, I will rectify it
within the line number optimization phase in my OMF post processor
product.
I know it's an open report though I can't give any timeframe of course.
It's a rather benign issue so I don't imagine we'll hotfix it
unless it gets bundled with something else.
Regards,
Lee
 

{smallsort}

Re:Multiple line #0 in LINN32's?

In article <45d4afd1$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,
Lee Cantey < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
I know it's an open report though I can't give any timeframe of course.
It's a rather benign issue so I don't imagine we'll hotfix it
unless it gets bundled with something else.
Glad to see you posting Lee. How about making that address
@codegear.com?
--
-David Dean
CodeGear C++ QA Engineer
<blogs.codegear.com/ddean/>
 

Re:Multiple line #0 in LINN32's?

David Dean [CodeGear] wrote:
Quote
In article <45d4afd1$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,
Glad to see you posting Lee. How about making that address
@codegear.com?
You know, I made that change right *after* I posted. :)
Lee