From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain <chastain@cygnus.com>
To: dan@cgsoftware.com
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: So what is wrong with v3 C++
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 10:28:00 -0000
Message-id: <200106291629.JAA01818@bosch.cygnus.com>
X-SW-Source: 2001-06/msg00239.html

Daniel Berlin writes:

> The thing is, it shouldn't match against demangled forms, it should
> match against *fully qualified* forms.

Ah, I feel some illumination coming on.

> Aclass a;
> int c;
> c = int a::george(int, int)(5, 6);
> 
> That's what we've got now.

gdb's goal is to have an expression evaluator that is some reasonable
subset of the language under test.

In K & R C, the translation from "demangled" -> "fully qualified" is trivial.
In ANSI C, the translation from "demangled" -> "fully qualified" takes work.
  You have to convert "foo(int, int)" -> "foo".
  This conversion is actually built into a string matcher!
In C++, the translation from "demangled" -> "fully qualified" is hairy.
  There are a lot of cases and changing the string matchers is hopeless.

It sounds like we need a much more detailed demangler interface, where
the demangler gives us the demangled name, the fully qualified name,
plus any other forms of the name we care about.

Michael