-fsquangle

[Andrew Macleod]

>> > However, I do not understand how `squangle' works. Is there
>> > a runtime penalty associated with it? If not, why not change
>> > to `squangle' mode by default? 
>> 
>> There is no runtime penalty. It is just a different mangling
>> algorithm. There are different reasons why it is not default:
>> 
>> - last I heard, it was not complete (i.e. the spec defining it in
>>   gxxint.texi was not fully implemented). I'm not sure whether this
>>   is still the case.

I haven't looked real close lately, but I think its fully implemented.
The only thing I recall turning off was the 'n' repeat counter,
because it wasn't being demangled properly.

>> - demangling it is incomplete/broken

To the bets of my knowledge, it was just the 'n' counter.  Mark has done
a lot of stuff to squangling since, and I was under the impression he
has corrected all this. True Mark?  (Besides, we can always change the
spec :-)

>> - it is not binary compatible

Definately not :-)

> If binary compatibility is an issue, make it an option in the
> configure script and advertise it in the INSTALL docs.


It will be the default eventually, once we default to a whole pile of 
things which break binary compatibility (all at once).

Certainly if there is anything which either doesn't demangle properly,
or mangles diffrently in 2 files and causes linking problems, let me
know. Right now Im not aware of any mangling problems. 

Andrew