This is the mail archive of the
java@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: GCJ and generics
Bryce McKinlay writes:
> On Oct 15, 2003, at 4:52 AM, Tom Tromey wrote:
>
> >>>>>> "Cedric" == Cedric Berger <cedric@berger.to> writes:
> >
> > Cedric> I think generics define multiple functions with the same
> > arguments
> > Cedric> but different return values. Could that be the problem?
> >
> > Yes, see PR 9861.
> >
> > We'll have to change the mangling to make this work.
> > We should probably tack this on the new ABI work -- i.e., not declare
> > the new ABI finished until this is done.
>
> With the new ABI we won't be married to any particular name mangling
> scheme - that is, the name mangling can be changed without breaking
> binary compatibility, so it isn't a major issue.
I suspect that what Tom meant was that we would like to fix this
problem, but we need the new ABI to do it. Anyway, you're quite
right: we'll need to fix our mangling so that we generate unique
names.
> Names will only have to be a) unique within each compilation unit
> and b) descriptive enough to aid debugging. Changing to Java's name
> mangling would be a logical choice. That would confuse GDB but the
> new ABI is going to confuse it anyway.
Not much, I wouldn't think.
Andrew.