From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12641 invoked by alias); 10 Sep 2002 00:34:21 -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 12556 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2002 00:34:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO molenda.com) (192.220.74.81) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 10 Sep 2002 00:34:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 56486 invoked by uid 19025); 10 Sep 2002 00:33:18 -0000 Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2002 17:34:00 -0000 From: Jason Molenda To: Adam Fedor Cc: gdb Subject: Re: Apple's Objective-C language patch Message-ID: <20020909173318.A50843@molenda.com> References: <3D7D0186.8020103@doc.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <3D7D0186.8020103@doc.com>; from fedor@doc.com on Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 02:16:06PM -0600 X-SW-Source: 2002-09/txt/msg00063.txt.bz2 Hi Adam, I'm on not on the Apple gdb deverloper team, nor am I a member of the FSF gdb maintainers, so the comments and $3 will get you a cup of coffee. Feel free to ignore me. On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 02:16:06PM -0600, Adam Fedor wrote: > I've distilled and modified Apple's gdb patches for adding Objective-C > language support. I've had several people test it and I suppose I might > be ready to submit it soon, but first I wanted to ask a few questions. Wow! > ftp://ftp.gnustep.org/pub/gnustep/contrib/gdb-objc-patch.tar.gz What is the history behind objc-exp.y? Is this from the old gnustep-gdb patch that'd been floating around since the mid-90's (the one that Michael Snyder wrote while at NeXT)? The Apple sources have the ObjC support rolled in c-exp.y; it doesn't seem unreasonable given the overlap between the two expression syntaxes. Mmmm...a testsuite/gdb.objc directory, you don't say... hey, what do you know, the Apple gdb repository now has a gdb.objc directory! Huzzah! ;-) The change to symtab.c:lookup_partial_symbol is incorrect, you should drop it from the patch. (it was in the Apple source drop that you based your patch on; it is gone now from our sources) Do you really need objfile_demangle_msymbols() ? minsyms.c should already be handling this correctly via install_minimal_symbols. I think the changes to minsyms.c, objfiles.h, and the references to that func in symtab.[ch] are unnecessary. But then, I haven't tested that at all. Using objfile_demangle_msymbols can have the unfortunate side-effect of running all minsyms through the demangler twice -- the current Apple sources have hacked out the demangle pass done by install_minimal_symbols, but I don't think that's the right approach for the FSF sources. On the topic of demangling, are the ObjC symbol names mangled on an ELF system? On MachO, ObjC names are stored in the object file without any mangling. I think ObjC used to be used on some platforms where mangling was necessary (Windows?) but I don't know if anyone is still using ObjC in an environment where names are mangled. It's a minor concern; not the sort of thing which should hold up the patch from acceptance into the FSF sources--and I'm sure there are more knowledable people than me on this topic. I only read over the patches very quickly, but it looks reasonable to me. Good work! J