This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [patch] java run-time stack trace
- To: Per Bothner <per at bothner dot com>
- Subject: Re: [patch] java run-time stack trace
- From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- Date: 07 Feb 2001 21:14:28 -0700
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, java at gcc dot gnu dot org
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Reply-To: tromey at redhat dot com
>>>>> "Per" == Per Bothner <email@example.com> writes:
Per> This patch accomplishes that. It does have the undesirable
Per> side-effect that C or C++ functions are are written Java-style
Per> (i.e no * or ::):
Per> but I think that is reasonable enough for a Java stack printer.
Per> Any objections to checking this in (now, before the branch)?
I think it is fine: it is low risk, correct, useful, etc.
c++filt is part of gcc so I don't think there is any danger with
Per> I believe glibc includes a demangler. It would be better to use
Per> that when available but that requires some configury magic.
Could you add a PR for this?