From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6568 invoked by alias); 6 Dec 2001 20:43:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 6429 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 20:43:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO heimdall.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.17) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 6 Dec 2001 20:43:17 -0000 Received: from zaretsky ([192.116.55.139]) by heimdall.inter.net.il (Mirapoint) with ESMTP id BBY14084; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 22:43:11 +0200 (IST) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 12:43:00 -0000 From: "Eli Zaretskii" To: drow@mvista.com Message-Id: <1659-Thu06Dec2001224222+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il> X-Mailer: emacs 21.1.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9 CC: gdb@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <20011206120205.A1278@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel Jacobowitz on Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:02:05 -0500) Subject: Re: RFC: Formatting of type output Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <20011206120205.A1278@nevyn.them.org> X-SW-Source: 2001-12/txt/msg00064.txt.bz2 > Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:02:05 -0500 > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > > That means that, regrettably, they are formatted differently; it is closer > to the v2 demangler than to the v3 demangler, but different from both > (classes get prefixed by "class" even in C++, for example). Could you please post a few examples how they are different? It's hard to reason about this without seeing some live examples; I guess I don't know enough about this problem to figure this out myself. > Does anything mechanical depend on the format of type output, besides our > testsuite? The documentation might include some examples which could need to be changed. Obviously, this is not a grave problem, but since you asked...