This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC to open the C++ demangle API?
- From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>, Phil Edwards <phil at jaj dot com>
- Cc: Carlo Wood <carlo at alinoe dot com>, John Levon <levon at movementarian dot org>, Andrew Marlow <apm35 at student dot open dot ac dot uk>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2002 10:53:38 -0800
- Subject: Re: GCC to open the C++ demangle API?
- References: <org03g9i5a.fsf@free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
--On Monday, March 04, 2002 05:45:21 PM -0300 Alexandre Oliva
<aoliva@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Mar 4, 2002, Phil Edwards <phil@jaj.com> wrote:
>
>> The cplus_demangle_v3 is the more public entry point, I /think/, and
>> the __cxa_demangle one is for completeness with the rest of the new ABI.
>
> If __cxa_demangle is indeed demanded by the C++ ABI, then it appears
> to me that it would be appropriate to place Carlo's implementation in
> libsupc++, whose license is already GPL plus runtime exception.
There's no point in having two of these things. Whichever one is
better (Carlo's version, or the version we originally contributed)
should go in.
The problem is that the one that we contributed -- thinking that it would
be placed under a libgcc-style license -- was, over my objections, only
placed in the FSF tree under the GPL. There's no reason to think that
RMS is going to allow Carlo's version to be libgcc'd while our version
was not. The right place to take this debate is to the FSF; there is
nothing we can do here.
--
Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com