This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Get rid of underscore.c
- From: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
- To: Richard dot Earnshaw at arm dot com
- Cc: "H. J. Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>, Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com>,zack at codesourcery dot com, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, dj at redhat dot com,binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 16:28:07 +0100
- Subject: Re: Get rid of underscore.c
- References: <200209201518.g8KFIpf06076@pc960.cambridge.arm.com>
On Fri, 20 Sep 2002 16:18:51 +0100, Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha@arm.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 20 Sep 2002 08:00:08 -0700, "H. J. Lu" <hjl@lucon.org> wrote:
>>
>> > How about this? Move cxxfilt.c to libiberty, but never compile it in
>> > libiberty. Buy default, binutils will compile cxxfilt in its binutils
>> > directory.
>>
>> Why? Why build c++filt in binutils? Why?
>>
>> The demanger should be bundled with the mangler, i.e. the compiler.
>
> Why should somebody using a.n.other compiler need to install gcc to get
> the demangler?
Other compilers should have their own c++filt. In my experience, they
usually do. The support for other demangling styles in cp-demangle is
mostly useful for use in gdb.
Jason