From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1617 invoked by alias); 13 Jun 2003 18:53:48 -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 1602 invoked from network); 13 Jun 2003 18:53:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp7.Stanford.EDU) (171.67.16.34) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 13 Jun 2003 18:53:47 -0000 Received: (from root@localhost) by smtp7.Stanford.EDU (8.12.9/8.12.9) id h5DIrk7Q011371 for gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 11:53:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jackfruit.Stanford.EDU (jackfruit.Stanford.EDU [171.64.38.136]) by smtp7.Stanford.EDU (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h5DIrg3J011337; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 11:53:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from carlton@localhost) by jackfruit.Stanford.EDU (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h5DIrg815627; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 11:53:42 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: jackfruit.Stanford.EDU: carlton set sender to carlton@math.stanford.edu using -f To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa] always use demangled name to set scope References: <20030612231727.GA19870@nevyn.them.org> <20030613042214.GA24015@nevyn.them.org> <20030613043834.GA24239@nevyn.them.org> From: David Carlton Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 18:53:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20030613043834.GA24239@nevyn.them.org> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Common Lisp) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-06/txt/msg00471.txt.bz2 On Fri, 13 Jun 2003 00:38:34 -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz said: > On Thu, Jun 12, 2003 at 09:28:13PM -0700, David Carlton wrote: >> Yeah, but we need DW_TAG_namespace to do [nested type deduction], >> and a version of GCC providing that probably won't be released >> until next calendar year. I certainly don't use demangled names to >> do nested type deduction if we have DW_TAG_namespace, but I do >> think it will be important for the next two or three years. > That's namespace deduction. Nested type deduction is a slightly > different story - the principle is the same but we already have all > the information we need. Not if the type is nested inside a namespace. If your code is full of namespace N { class C { ... }; } then, as far as I can tell, you can't tell that C is really N::C without either DW_TAG_namespace or demangled names. And if you think it's C, then users get confused if they refer to it as N::C and nothing happens, and you get constant RTTI warnings when printing out stuff. (Which, besides being annoying, make ddd impossible to use, which matters to some people.) Namespace deduction is less important, I agree. David Carlton carlton@math.stanford.edu