While debugging the incrementText C++ example, I am able to set breakpoints and debug. However, when I cycle through and complete the breaks I get symbols not loaded for ustationDLL.pdb instead of focus back to the app. After line 403 as shown, I get the Symbols not loaded. I somewhat remember this from before... but I do not recall any project setting that could be causing this issue. Any thoughts are appreciated.
Not sure if this is the problem you are reporting, but Bentley do not provide the symbols (PDB files) for any of their code. So you will see many of these types of warnings when debugging your program as soon as it steps out of your code and into Bentley's code, such as when calling an SDK function or re-entering the main processing loop for MicroStation. This is almost certainly what is happening here at the end of your function. To continue, you need to hit "Go" (F5) because you can at best only see the disassembly for Bentley's code.
Tldr; this is a normal warning you can ignore.
--Piers PorterAltiva Software
This is exactly what I suspected. I can hit F5 and continue with the application and continue debugging other portions normally and as soon as it steps out of code again it will give a similar warning. I am fine with this (just annoying). I just wanted to make sure this is common to everyone debugging native C++ Bentley applications.
Thank you and Best Regards...
I agree wtih Piers, this is something we probably have to live with. There are some configuration options how to tell Visual Studio debugger to what functions don't step in, but it seems there is no way how to tell "continue when a specific module / dll is reached".
But maybe Robert Hook or somebody else from Bentley will provide some hint.
Labyrinth Technology | dev.notes() | cad.point
Jan Šlegr - Thank you.
Hi Marty Robbins,
Piers Porter is correct, that Bentley currently does not provide a public facing symbolserver. Jan is also correct, that some Visual Studio project settings can be tuned to modify symbol resolution, loading, and module exclusion behaviors, like the topics below explain:
Hi Robert Hook
I am continuing to review those options and settings. However, I am fine with the current behavior.