From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Benjamin Kosnik To: Daniel Berlin Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: can't find class named `foo', as given by C++ RTTI Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 01:32:00 -0000 Message-id: References: <878zidi1e9.fsf@cgsoftware.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-06/msg00212.html > We already rely on being able to get mangled names from debug info too > much. This is why the clone constructors have the wrong name (they > end up being fred() instead of fred::fred()). Their > specification has no DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name, because it can't. They > have no DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name beause they shouldn't need to. > > What really should be happening is that we should be generating > qualified names on our own, and ignoring DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name > completely. Ah. I get it now. So this namespace issue is probably the same problem that nested types are having... I was wondering about the ctor issue. > And we should be properly supporting namespaces, using directives, > etc, anyway. It would also let us be able to support java packages > properly and whatnot. These are all required features in gdb, not optional features, right? > I can make gcc output this info in about a day. Well then. > i've got a collection of references for symbol table > designs that can handle these things properly and efficiently, and > close enough to the existing basic symbol table structure that you > wouldn't have to start anywhere near from scratch, or come up with a > design on your own. Might as well post the links or citations if you've got them handy. -benjamin