From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25175 invoked by alias); 20 Nov 2003 16:09:05 -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 25160 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2003 16:09:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (207.219.125.105) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 20 Nov 2003 16:09:04 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 912F42B8F; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 11:08:59 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3FBCE71B.7060100@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:09:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030820 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: Will Cohen , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Slow handling of C++ symbol names References: <3FBBDC27.50204@redhat.com> <20031119211355.GA31069@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-11/txt/msg00169.txt.bz2 > > Have you tried a more recent version of GDB? This may have been > improved. Definitely some startup time issues were fixed. Nothing in the ChangeLogs jumped out. > Also, the demangler actually comes from GCC, not GDB. I don't see GCC being motivated to fix it though :-( > All we can do is > try to call it less often. Which leads to the question. Why does GDB demangle symbols? My simplistic understanding of the code is that GDB only needs the "iw" (a.k.a., demangled string up to but excluding the lparen and ignoring white space) part of the symbol in the search table (the rest isn't so critical and can be constructed on-demand). Andrew