Re: Another Fortran problem...

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>]

On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 02:58:35PM +0100, Fran?ois-Xavier Coudert wrote:
> > Somewhat impractical.  I think we would be best off ignoring linkage
> > names for Fortran, or else GCC not emitting them... I don't know
> > which.  Won't they generally match the names in the ELF symbol table?
> 
> Yes, they probably will. Don't they serve any other useful purpose?
> (not emitting them in GCC fixes the problem)

I'm not sure.  In C++ we use them to extract namespace and class
hierarchy information, which was only represented in DWARF relatively
recently (circa 3.3).  They should be unnecessary now in most cases
and other compilers do not admit them.

I can see how they could be useful for non-defining declarations, in
case the definition was in an object without debugging information.

Let's give it a day or two in case anyone else has comments, but I
don't think DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name has any benefit for Fortran
support.  In that case, we can change GCC HEAD not to emit them and
GDB not to use them.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery