This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [rfc] physname cross-check [Re: [RFA] Typedef'd method parameters [0/4]]


On 05/17/2011 11:33 AM, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
On Tue, 17 May 2011 20:15:18 +0200, Keith Seitz wrote:
Is reverting dwarf2_physname better or worse than DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name?

In which single case can be dwarf2_physname better than DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name? That's the question. dwarf2_physname is AFAIK to give the linkage name and DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name always matches that.

Ideally the two should be equivalent. I don't remember all the specifics any more, but there were problems with constructors (already mentioned) and templates. These might have simply been compiler bugs. Template bugs might now be fixed because of the new template attributes.


Using DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name will not pass cpexprs.exp without some
hacking; the demangled name will need to be re-parsed (to remove
typedefs

DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name already has all the typedefs removed - it is the linkage name.

It should, but IIRC, I kept seeing, e.g., "std::string" show up in the demangled form of DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name. Perhaps this was due to an older compiler I was using? I cannot seem to reproduce this today. [Or maybe I am just remembering something else?]


Sorry, my memory of this has bitrotted quite a bit.
Keith


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