From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 82178 invoked by alias); 14 Dec 2018 22:39:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 82143 invoked by uid 89); 14 Dec 2018 22:39:39 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:1142, HTo:U*tom, tromey, Tromey X-HELO: mail-oi1-f195.google.com Received: from mail-oi1-f195.google.com (HELO mail-oi1-f195.google.com) (209.85.167.195) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 14 Dec 2018 22:39:37 +0000 Received: by mail-oi1-f195.google.com with SMTP id x202so5814801oif.13 for ; Fri, 14 Dec 2018 14:39:37 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <460cb971-0e21-1e3e-4920-8b3ee7290cf7@redhat.com> <736e8303-b724-f96d-54f5-46bff99fa34d@redhat.com> <57d33aa7-4e37-a09c-4bdc-974b5f654d33@redhat.com> <2928eac9-9363-ddb8-21eb-df878d2d4837@redhat.com> <20181207104011.GD12380@tucnak> <875zw5cjn9.fsf@tromey.com> In-Reply-To: From: Jason Merrill Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2018 22:39:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: RFC: libiberty PATCH to disable demangling of ancient mangling schemes To: Tom Tromey , Pedro Alves Cc: Jakub Jelinek , Nick Clifton , Ian Lance Taylor , Richard Biener , matz@gcc.gnu.org, Scott Gayou , gcc-patches List , Binutils , GDB Patches Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-SW-Source: 2018-12/txt/msg00163.txt.bz2 On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 4:00 PM Jason Merrill wrote: > On 12/7/18 12:48 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: > >>>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves writes: > > > > Pedro> I would say that it's very, very unlikely, and not worth it of the > > Pedro> maintenance burden. > > > > Agreed, and especially true for the more unusual demanglings like Lucid > > or EDG. > > > > On the gdb side perhaps we can get rid of "demangle-style" now. It > > probably hasn't worked properly in years, and after this it would be > > guaranteed not to. > > So, here's the patch to tear out the old code, which passes the GCC > regression testsuite. I also tried building binutils/gdb with it, and > both will need to remove code that calls cplus_mangle_opname for dealing > with the old mangling scheme. GDB/binutils folks, how do you want to handle this? Shall I go ahead with this patch, with the understanding that there will be associated changes necessary when merging it into the binutils-gdb repository, or go with the small disabling patch to start with? Jason