Re: Mangle question

[Carlo Wood <carlo at alinoe dot com>]

On Mon, Aug 28, 2000 at 04:06:06PM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
> digit.  Then a customer had a testcase with 12 or so of them.  By have
> it done this way, we preserve backward and forwards compatibility for
> 99% of the code (<10 of something), and by having _[0-9]+/[^0-9] for
> the new case, we then can have any number (literally) of somethings
> going forward.

Thanks Mike, but in this case it isn't _[0-9]+/[^0-9], you are
using [0-9]+_[^0-9].  The underscore is on the other side of the
digits :/.  For example: "...T9c..." but "...T10_c..."
It already occured to me that perhaps the idea was to use "...T_10c..."
but that is just not the case.  Could this indeed be a "bug"?

Anyway as I said, it doesn't matter.  Especially not since we're
moving to another mangling sheme.

Regards,

... O wait.  I promised to give two bugs I found in the current
demangler.  Ok...

1) destructors are demangled as: foobar::~foobar(void)
   that should be foobar::~foobar() !

2) *every* class name (of the form <digits><class-name>) can be
   prepended by an underscore in order to seperate it from a
   previous digit in a way that is not predictable.  There can
   no special circumstances reasonably be given.  Therefore, you
   must always check for an underscore when reading <digits> and
   eat it when it is there.  This is not done by the current
   demangler, which is why it fails to demangle certain constructs.
   For example:

   __vc__Q2t12basic_string3ZcZt18string_char_traits1ZcZt24__default_alloc_template2b1i0_3RepUi

                                                                                       ^
                                                                unexpected seperator __|

   The demangler I wrote over the weekend makes of this:
   basic_string<char, string_char_traits<char>, __default_alloc_template<true, 0> >::Rep::operator[](unsigned int)

When I get time to move to the new abi myself, I'll have to write a
demangler for that one too -- be sure that I'll run torture tests on
the new abi too then and will come up with new bugs ;).  I suppose
nobody feels like fixing the above for the old abi.

Regards,

-- 
Carlo Wood <carlo@alinoe.com>                        -=- Jesus Loves you -=-