Yes I understand. But that is not convenient when you will want to step into each one because you don't know what you might be looking for. Sequences like e.g.:
getterA()->getterB()->method1();
getterC()->getterD()->method2();
getterA()->getterB()->method3();
etc....
are simply a pain in the ass to step into. I know it's "filthy", but I am taking to writing the underlying class member variable (within its class body) instead of going via the getter just to make debugging less painful (coding is for my own purposes, I wouldn't do that in other circumstances).
As I wrote, when I did C# I know I found debugging/VS much more pleasant. I had not appreciated that e.g.
[DebuggerStepThrough]
someFunctionDefinition() {}
was C# only. Obviously C# combines debugger directives with code because it can do what it likes. I had assumed in C++ I would be able to "annotate" with some compiler-debugger attribute to achieve similar. It looks like they have a strict rule that any attributes must be to do with compilation only, not debugging, as gcc and gdb are treated as quite separate entities. I guess I need gcc to be willing to put in some directives/hints for debugging but that is not going to happen?
