From: Mark Kettenis <kettenis@chello.nl>
To: "H. J. Lu" <hjl@lucon.org>
Cc: binutils@sources.redhat.com, GDB <gdb@sources.redhat.com>
Subject: Re: FYI: A new C++ demangler
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 20:57:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <86znjmp0c4.fsf@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: "H. J. Lu"'s message of "Thu, 10 Jul 2003 07:35:57 -0700"
"H. J. Lu" <hjl@lucon.org> writes:
> I will put a new C++ demangler in Linux binutils, which should fix all
> known bugs in the old demangler. It is written in C++. It will be
> enabled only if there is a working C++ compiler. Otherwise, the old
> demangler will be used.
Having read the discussion on the GCC mailing list, I am convinced it
is undesirable to have two demanglers that have overlapping
functionaility for GDB, especially if the demangler is selected based
on the build environment as you propose.
GDB should be buildable by a ISO C90 compiler, so we can't use C++ for
any of its "standard" parts.
I could live with making the demangler "optional", and removing the
old demangler completely. But only if the new demangler is a major
improvement over the old one (which I can't judge).
Could someone fix the old demangler, or write a new one in
plain C (or re-write the C++ one in C)? Pretty please?
Mark
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-07-10 20:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-07-10 14:36 H. J. Lu
2003-07-10 14:40 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2003-07-10 14:54 ` H. J. Lu
2003-07-10 15:28 ` David Carlton
2003-07-10 15:36 ` H. J. Lu
2003-07-10 15:44 ` David Carlton
2003-07-10 20:57 ` Mark Kettenis [this message]
2003-07-10 21:17 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-07-10 21:44 ` H. J. Lu
2003-07-10 22:58 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2003-07-10 23:19 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-07-10 21:22 ` DJ Delorie
2003-07-10 15:42 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2003-07-10 15:51 ` H. J. Lu
2003-07-10 16:38 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2003-07-10 21:57 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2003-07-11 0:36 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2003-07-12 18:02 Nathanael Nerode
2003-07-15 16:17 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-07-15 18:03 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2003-07-15 19:02 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-07-15 19:03 ` Alexandre Oliva
2003-07-15 19:16 ` H. J. Lu
2003-07-15 19:49 ` Alexandre Oliva
2003-07-15 19:55 ` H. J. Lu
2003-07-15 22:30 ` Alexandre Oliva
2003-07-15 23:14 ` H. J. Lu
2003-07-16 2:31 ` Alexandre Oliva
2003-07-16 3:21 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2003-07-16 17:12 ` Nathanael Nerode
2003-07-15 19:16 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2003-07-15 19:23 ` H. J. Lu
2003-07-15 20:05 ` DJ Delorie
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=86znjmp0c4.fsf@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org \
--to=kettenis@chello.nl \
--cc=binutils@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=hjl@lucon.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox