[libstdc++] Make use of runtime demangler

Benjamin Kosnik bkoz@redhat.com
Mon Apr 1 10:28:00 GMT 2002

> If your demangler is better, we can replace the one in libiberty with
> yours.  Or, we can take the one in libiberty and fix the problems you've
> found.  We certainly should end up with only one demangler at the end
> of the day.

Ok. So, the idea of taking the demangler out of libiberty is still sound,
regardless of if the definition of __cxa_demangle is to remain the same as
it is now? 


> We should probably remove the IN_LIBGCC2 stuff.  In the intial version of
> this stuff (this is before libsupc++, when runtime support for C++ was in
> libgcc) that made sense.  Now, it doesn't. 

Should __cxa_demangle just be in a separate file? Or, should 
IN_GLIBCPP_V3 stay and just IN_LIBGCC2 get removed?

> 1) Those two files do not build warning-free because in the v3 build,
> -DHAVE_CONFIG_H is not passed (thus the headers for malloc and whatnot
> are not included) because we can't give it the config.h from libiberty.
> I played with building a symlink to libiberty's config.h but I don't
> know the multilibs scenario well enough.  Help is requested.  For now,
> we pass -Wno-error in the special build rules.

libmath uses libstdc++'s config.h. Perhaps these files could as well?


More information about the Libstdc++ mailing list