RFA: Please review the new C++ demangler patch

[H. J. Lu]

On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 01:11:54PM -0500, Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
> 
> >There are 2 problems:
> >
> >1. We have to modify every package which expects demangler in
> >libiberty. It is bad for compatibility.
> 
> True. However, I think this is the way out. As long as it's properly
> documented, I think this will be ok.

Think a developer who has to support different platforms or
a package which has no real maintainer, compatibility is very
important. We shouldn't break compatibility just because it
may make our lives easier.

> 
> >2. libdemangle has few use for libstdc++. It is not a big deal,
> >but maybe confusing to users.
> 
> Right. I was just using this to explain the idea. In reality, there
> needs to be a __cxa_demangle in libsupc++, irregardless: libdemangle
> should just link it from there and be done. Still, it's easier to
> express the dependency info this way.

Are you suggesting libdemangle should depend on a C++ library?


H.J.