This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Patch to fix PR9861
TJ Laurenzo writes:
> On 9/26/05, Bryce McKinlay <mckinlay@redhat.com> wrote:
> > Andrew Haley wrote:
> >
> > >Ian Lance Taylor writes:
> > > > Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com> writes:
> > > >
> > > > > How about simply
> > > > >
> > > > > f.main(String[])void
> > > > >
> > > > > That's the nearest to the Java signature form.
> > > >
> > > > I don't know, it's kind of ugly and confusing.
> > >
> > >Looks OK to me, but maybe that's a Java thing. Or maybe I'm weird.
> > >
> > >
> > I'll also cast a vote for this form - it is the simplest and most Java
> > like. I don't like the ":".
>
> The patch for this is attached (fix-java-demangle.diff). I added a
> flag DMGL_RET_POSTFIX for the demangler. When this flag is present,
> the return type is output after the function signature with a space
> separating the two. This option is enabled by default for the Java
> demangler. I modified the test harness and added test cases for this
> as well. This patch applies against cvs head, so it replaces the
> libiberty parts of my previous patch.
>
> I am also attaching a patch to gdb that uses this new flag to put
> return types after the function signature for normal C++ symbols
> stored in the lookup table too.
> This helps with CNI debugging and as a consequence, works around
> the issue that was pointed out earlier with selecting template
> functions. I'm not terribly familiar with gdb internals, so I am
> not certain if this second patch causes any other problems or
> whether the maintainers want to change the behavior for template
> functions.
OK. We'll see.
I'm not keen on the space, but it's not important enough to reject
your patch.
Andrew.