Re: [RFA] Introduce notion of "search name"

[Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>]

Paul Hilfinger <hilfingr@gnat.com> writes:
> > I'm unhappy with it, partly because not having a lifetime for these
> > things make it harder to identify memory leaks (of which we already
> > have quite enough, thank you).  But there are two options:
> > 
> >   - decide that lazily demangling is useful, and arrange to pass
> >     an objfile to every call to SYMBOL_DEMANGLED_NAME.  This also
> >     affects, at least, SYMBOL_NATURAL_NAME and SYMBOL_PRINT_NAME.
> >     I think it wouldn't be hard, just messy.
> >   - decide that being picky about the storage lifetime doesn't matter,
> >     and Paul's approximation is good enough.
> > 
> > I'm happier with the global hash table than I am with kludging around
> > searching for an objfile, certainly.  What do you think of the options?
> 
> If leaking is your concern, how about this: I'll arrange our global
> hash table for demangled names to store the strings themselves in a
> a corresponding global obstack.  That way, the total amount of memory devoted 
> to this particular set of demangled names is easy to monitor.  
> 
> There are a few opportunities, I suppose, to clear the whole thing,
> such as when someone executes 'file' or 'symbol-file' (with no
> arguments).  Not sure if they're worth exploiting.
> 
> > > Ah, I have been putting off syncing the ada-* files with ours (they
> > > aren't compiled at the moment, and I feel no need to clutter the 
> > > public file system with unused versions.  However, perhaps it's time to
> > > check in the current versions, which are considerably different from the
> > > snapshot that's currently there.  In short: you are quite right, and the
> > > current Ada demangler returns NULL for non-Ada-mangled symbols.
> 
> > Perhaps it's time to do this again.  I'm not sure how to handle it.
> 
> I don't think that's a problem.  I'll take another stylistic pass over
> the Ada sources and then just check in our current versions. Since
> they aren't compiled (yet), they can't break anything, after all.

Daniel, you've got higher standards on this issue than I do, but I'd
like to see your standards prevail.  If you and Paul can work out
something, then I'll approve of it.