From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3349 invoked by alias); 4 Apr 2005 21:49:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 3267 invoked from network); 4 Apr 2005 21:48:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 4 Apr 2005 21:48:57 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j34LmvBr004051 for ; Mon, 4 Apr 2005 17:48:57 -0400 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j34LmvO31957; Mon, 4 Apr 2005 17:48:57 -0400 Received: from redhat.com (dhcp-172-16-25-137.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.25.137]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j34LmtKi025025; Mon, 4 Apr 2005 17:48:55 -0400 Message-ID: <4251B646.7010801@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 21:49:00 -0000 From: Michael Snyder Organization: Red Hat, Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4.3) Gecko/20040924 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Demme CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: D Symbol Demangling References: <1112582221.14153.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <425185A9.8090104@redhat.com> <1112647505.14153.46.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <1112647505.14153.46.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2005-04/txt/msg00047.txt.bz2 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.