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: RFC: libiberty PATCH to disable demangling of ancient mangling schemes

On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 4:00 PM Jason Merrill <> wrote:
> On 12/7/18 12:48 PM, Tom Tromey wrote:
> >>>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves <> writes:
> >
> > Pedro> I would say that it's very, very unlikely, and not worth it of the
> > Pedro> maintenance burden.
> >
> > Agreed, and especially true for the more unusual demanglings like Lucid
> > or EDG.
> >
> > On the gdb side perhaps we can get rid of "demangle-style" now.  It
> > probably hasn't worked properly in years, and after this it would be
> > guaranteed not to.
> So, here's the patch to tear out the old code, which passes the GCC
> regression testsuite.  I also tried building binutils/gdb with it, and
> both will need to remove code that calls cplus_mangle_opname for dealing
> with the old mangling scheme.

GDB/binutils folks, how do you want to handle this? Shall I go ahead
with this patch, with the understanding that there will be associated
changes necessary when merging it into the binutils-gdb repository, or
go with the small disabling patch to start with?


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