From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Per Bothner To: Andrew Cagney Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: C++ FAIL counts and the effect of demangler fix Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 15:14:00 -0000 Message-id: References: <200102141649.IAA28922@bosch.cygnus.com> <3A8C1E5E.F4A2C5E2@cygnus.com> <3A8C5FCB.9651AA23@cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-02/msg00195.html Andrew Cagney writes: > As far as I know, GDB works tolerably well now for 3.0 - it doesn't dump > core for instance :-). I'm just geting in and being clear to people > that think 3.0 C++ support perfect needs to be perfect for 5.1 :-) > > One likely reality is that: GDB 5.1 will come out, GCC 3.0 will come out > and then a GDB 5.2 will appear. That seems ok. I don't think we should hold up 5.1 for "perfect" 3.0 C++ support - in fact it is better, I think, for 5.1 to come out before Gcc 3.0, as long as it has at least tolerable 3.0 C++ support. I could list my version of a priority list of C++ features, but since I'm unlikely to do anything about it, there;s not point. -- --Per Bothner per@bothner.com http://www.bothner.com/~per/