This is the mail archive of the 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: analysis of libiberty/cp-demangle.c for libsupc++/__cxa_demangle

Gabriel Dos Reis <> writes:

>   As I said earlier, we should not disguise the removal (if that were
> to happen) as a bug fix to make libsupc++ self-contained.  I'm of the
> opinion that the demangler has proven to be useful and is still useful
> (yes, it could be improved, but that is a different story).  I do not
> think we should take actions to discourage people to contribute.
> Even if I happened to disagree with Carlo on some technical aspects, I
> do not believe that the removal of its contributed demangler (which we
> actually asked for and acclamed!) is fair or the right thing to do.
> It is not like he has announced to no longer maintain the demangler
> and we're shortage of maintainers. 

It's worth noting that the demanglers do of course have different
functionality.  Carlo's demangler includes features like
demangler::implementation_details which are never going to be in the
libiberty demangler.  And even if I do add an allocation interface to
the libiberty demangler, it's never going to be as convenient as the
allocator interface in C++.


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