From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30535 invoked by alias); 18 Feb 2004 00:20:55 -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 30370 invoked from network); 18 Feb 2004 00:20:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hawaii.kealia.com) (209.3.10.89) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 18 Feb 2004 00:20:53 -0000 Received: by hawaii.kealia.com (Postfix, from userid 2049) id 9FF3BCDF8; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:23:47 -0800 (PST) To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa] Add SYMBOL_SET_LINKAGE_NAME References: <20040216212406.GC17141@nevyn.them.org> From: David Carlton Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 00:20:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20040216212406.GC17141@nevyn.them.org> (Daniel Jacobowitz's message of "Mon, 16 Feb 2004 16:24:06 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) XEmacs/21.4 (Reasonable Discussion, linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2004-02/txt/msg00489.txt.bz2 On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 16:24:06 -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz said: > This patch adds a macro, SYMBOL_SET_LINKAGE_NAME, which is used to > set a symbol's name when the name should not be demangled. Used for > things like typedefs whose name comes from debug info. The idea is okay, but I don't like the name all that much. I once had a goal, which I've admittedly been lax about pursuing recently, that we would have a very clear distinction between linkage names (which really did mean names used by the linker) and natural names (i.e. the names in the source code), to the extent that, if we were to represent these by different types, then our code would almost compile. When we're talking about types, however, linkage names don't make much sense, only natural names. So, while it's true that your macro does set the field that, in the case of a symbol with both linkage and natural names, corresponds to the linkage name, that's really an implementation detail that should be shielded behind this macro. Having said that, I don't have any great suggestions for a better name. SYMBOL_SET_NATURAL_NAME? SYMBOL_SET_NATURAL_ONLY_NAME? Hmm. David Carlton carlton@kealia.com