This is the mail archive of the binutils@sourceware.cygnus.com mailing list for the binutils project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Demangler update?


   Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 10:20:46 -0700
   From: "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org>

   > In any case, we only need to fully solve the 90% case, in which there
   > is only one compiler around, while retaining enough flexibility to
   > handle unusual cases such as the one you describe.

   I don't think my case is that unusual. As of today, on my Linux
   box, there are C++ binaries linked with 4 different versions
   of libstdc++, compiled with 4 different versions of g++.

I hope you aren't trying to argue that you are a typical user.  I
believe that most developers use one compiler which they rarely
change.

   I prefer DSO over external program because it is small and
   has much less overhead. It is just my personal opinion.

But we walk smack into portability issues.  gcc and the binutils work
on dozens of systems.  What's the point of a solution which only works
on some, or, the way you wrote it, exactly one?

I know that you mainly, or perhaps exclusively, care about GNU/Linux,
but you know that the GNU maintainers care about many more systems.
Providing a solution which solves a general problem in a way which
only works on GNU/Linux is not acceptable.  You know that.

I personally have no objection to dynamic loading being an option,
provided that it is clearly documented, and that all it takes to add a
new demangling option is to drop a new shared object into some
directory.

Ian

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]