This is a big problem with gdb/dwarf and c++. It just does not work anywhere near as well as C does.
You don't even need template metaprogramming to get a horrible experience. Just imagine using std::transform and wanting to step. You obviously want to step through your lambda that you pass it. You don't want to step through the over 9000 lines of whatever the fuck libstdc++ is doing to make std::transform work. In most cases you can't even set a breakpoint in your lambda because breakpoints are set by line number, so you'll hit the break in the transform. Leaving you needing to reformat your source code and recompile just to set a reasonable breakpoint.
This particular problem could be solved if the debugger let you say "skip through some namespace (like std) but stop if it calls something else" but c++ debugging has all sorts of nonsense like this. Honestly I've just stopped using debuggers with c++ over a decade ago. It's just not worth fighting with it.
I think the people that need to think about debugging ergonomics isn't the standard committee or the library authors. It's the authors of whoever is writing the next debugger. Gdb is great for C but it really doesn't map to C++ well at all.
GDB has the "skip" command to help with this but it has limitations.
It stops you stepping into namespaces you don't want to see but doesn't do anything when you step out into them.
It also doesn't handle when code you don't want to see calls back into code you do - and, yes, I've recommended formatting lambdas to allow breakpoints before.
I believe DWARF does support columnar information these days so it actually should be possible to solve the one line lambda given code in GDB.
For looking at any data in C++ it's also very important to have GDB's pretty printers set up (and, likely, write some of your own).
Visual Studio debugger supported "Just My Code" since always for .NET applications and I believe they recently added something to this effect for C/C++ as well, although not nearly as flawless, of course.
You don't even need template metaprogramming to get a horrible experience. Just imagine using std::transform and wanting to step. You obviously want to step through your lambda that you pass it. You don't want to step through the over 9000 lines of whatever the fuck libstdc++ is doing to make std::transform work. In most cases you can't even set a breakpoint in your lambda because breakpoints are set by line number, so you'll hit the break in the transform. Leaving you needing to reformat your source code and recompile just to set a reasonable breakpoint.
This particular problem could be solved if the debugger let you say "skip through some namespace (like std) but stop if it calls something else" but c++ debugging has all sorts of nonsense like this. Honestly I've just stopped using debuggers with c++ over a decade ago. It's just not worth fighting with it.
I think the people that need to think about debugging ergonomics isn't the standard committee or the library authors. It's the authors of whoever is writing the next debugger. Gdb is great for C but it really doesn't map to C++ well at all.