This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: PATCH: Support the new demangler written in C++


On Jul  9, 2003, Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@integrable-solutions.net> wrote:

> Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com> writes:
> | On Jul  8, 2003, Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@integrable-solutions.net> wrote:
> | 
> | > Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.com> writes:
> | > |  It's not acceptable for GDB to magically build 
> | > | with the "good" demangler if there's a C++ compiler around and with 
> | > | the "bad" demangler if there isn't; can you imagine the confusing bug 
> | > | reports?  "It works for me with the same snapshot."  "Did you have a C++ 
> | > | compiler in your environment?"  Ick, ick, ick, ick, ick, ick, ick.
> | 
> | > Arguments along the same lines can be made if the demangler were
> | > written in C. 
> | 
> | Huh?  libiberty is part of GDB.  If there's a fixed C demangler, it'll
> | always be used, so I don't see your point.

> The point is about the availability of a C++ compiler.

GDB is written in C, not C++.  If libiberty got any C++ code, even if
such code was offered with a C-only interface, depending on the C++
compiler used to build it, it would still have dependencies on the C++
compilers' run-time.  This may be a problem.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva   Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer                 aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp        oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist                Professional serial bug killer


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]