Re: D Symbol Demangling

[John Demme <me@teqdruid.com>]

On Mon, 2005-04-04 at 14:48 -0700, Michael Snyder wrote:
> John Demme wrote:
> > By link compatible, I mean that I'll compile a D file with a D compiler
> > to a .o file, then I can link it with another .o file compiled with,
> > say, gcc.  So a source file can be either C or D, but not both (barring
> > some sort of bizarre scripting situations.)  An important note here,
> > however, is that because D can call C functions, some of the symbols in
> > a D object file won't be mangled.
> > 
> > I've been having trouble figuring out what differentiates the functions.
> > On the surface, the more complex ones don't work, but in my test,
> > there's only simple one.
> > 
> > Do I appear to be interfacing with GDB correctly?  If so, I'll triple
> > check my code.
> 
> Looks ok at first glance.  Do I understand that the D compiler
> is not gcc or gcc-derived?  That raises the question of whether
> the debug info in the D-compiled .o file is "correct" as far as
> gdb is concerned.  Something unexpected about that info might
> cause gdb to "lose its place", eg. in determining which functions
> belong to the D-compiled module.
> 
> 

That's correct.  It uses Walter Bright's C backend.  In fact, the DWARF2
information that it generates it total crap, as in just plain wrong in
some/most cases.  There is a gcc-derived version of it.  I'll give that
a try.

Thanks
John