4 ms·
This sort of thing drives me crazy sometimes. Why can't we have a high level assembly language which can represent the code that's executing. Right now I have t
by anon4 11y ago
This sort of thing drives me crazy sometimes. Why can't we have a high level assembly language which can represent the code that's executing. Right now I have the choice of either looking at the code, which can be wrong, or looking at assembly, which is hard to associate with the code. Why can't I look at annotated assembly which tells me exactly which part of the code it corresponds to?
- pcwalton 11y ago> Why can't I look at annotated assembly which tells me exactly which part of the code it corresponds to? Because modern optimizations make that impossible. (How do you represent a statement that GVN eliminated, for example?) Not doing those optimizations would make code unacceptably slow.
- pjc50 11y agoUse Visual Studio with optimisation off. Its disassembly view will then line up fairly well with the C++ source. (and with "structured exception handling" and a bit of hacking, you can get backtraces for machine exceptions as well)