GCJ and generics

Bryce McKinlay bryce@mckinlay.net.nz
Sun Oct 19 22:52:00 GMT 2003

On Oct 15, 2003, at 4:52 AM, Tom Tromey wrote:

>>>>>> "Cedric" == Cedric Berger <cedric@berger.to> writes:
> Cedric> I think generics define multiple functions with the same 
> arguments
> Cedric> but different return values. Could that be the problem?
> Yes, see PR 9861.
> We'll have to change the mangling to make this work.
> We should probably tack this on the new ABI work -- i.e., not declare
> the new ABI finished until this is done.

With the new ABI we won't be married to any particular name mangling 
scheme - that is, the name mangling can be changed without breaking 
binary compatibility, so it isn't a major issue. Names will only have 
to be a) unique within each compilation unit and b) descriptive enough 
to aid debugging. Changing to Java's name mangling would be a logical 
choice. That would confuse GDB but the new ABI is going to confuse it 



More information about the Java mailing list