This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: analysis of libiberty/cp-demangle.c forlibsupc++/__cxa_demangle
- From: "Zack Weinberg" <zack at codesourcery dot com>
- To: libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Ian Lance Taylor <ian at wasabisystems dot com>, Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz at redhat dot com>
- Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 00:32:53 -0800
- Subject: Re: analysis of libiberty/cp-demangle.c forlibsupc++/__cxa_demangle
- References: <email@example.com><firstname.lastname@example.org> <403AAA1B.email@example.com><firstname.lastname@example.org> <403AAE14.email@example.com><firstname.lastname@example.org><20040225063825.GA21326@disaster.jaj.com>
Phil Edwards <email@example.com> writes:
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 12:38:42AM -0500, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> Here is a patch for the 3.4 branch. This patch includes fixes to the
>> libiberty demangler, Benjamin's patches to libstdc++-v3 to use the
>> libiberty demangler rather than the libstdc++-v3 demangler, and
>> patches to the libstdc++-v3 testsuite so that it passes.
>> The appended patch does not include the diffs to the generated files,
>> nor does it include the two removed files.
> I don't think anybody had proposed actually removing the Wood/C++
> demangler. Did I miss an email?
The only reason I've seen for keeping it is the user-selectable
allocator capability. Has Ian now added that to the libiberty