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: C++ demangler fix

Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> cp-demangle.c isn't used just in libiberty, where using hashtab,
> xcalloc, XNEW etc. is fine, but also in libsupc++/libstdc++, where
> none of that is fine.  That is why cp-demangle.c only uses
> e.g. realloc, checks for allocation failures and propagates those to
> the caller if they happen (see allocation_failure field).  hashtab.o
> isn't linked into libstdc++ nor libsupc++, and the question is if we
> really do want to link all the hashtable code into libstdc++.
> How many hash table entries are there typically?  Is a hashtable
> required?

Three entries were required for the symbol in the testcase:

  "_ZSt7forwardIRN1x14refobjiteratorINS0_3refINS0_4mime30multipart_se" \
  "ction_processorObjIZ15get_body_parserIZZN14mime_processor21make_se" \
  "ction_iteratorERKNS2_INS3_10sectionObjENS0_10ptrrefBaseEEEbENKUlvE" \
  "_clEvEUlSB_bE_ZZNS6_21make_section_iteratorESB_bENKSC_clEvEUlSB_E0" \
  "_ENS1_INS2_INS0_20outputrefiteratorObjIiEES8_EEEERKSsSB_OT_OT0_EUl" \
  "mE_NS3_32make_multipart_default_discarderISP_EEEES8_EEEEEOT_RNSt16" \

I don't think there will many symbols with very many entries required.
I'm guessing that most symbols will require zero (which is why I made
it defer hashtable creation until it was required).

What kind of data structure would you like to see here, a realloc'd
array?  Do libsupc++ and libstdc++ use the demangler for anything more
performance-sensitive than exception printing?



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