This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [rfa] annotate blocks with C++ namespace information
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 16:23:13 -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com> said:
> On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 01:14:16PM -0800, David Carlton wrote:
> In this case Stanford is not contributing the code; contribution is a
> copyright related action, and they never had the copyright.
Fair enough.
>> Yes; it should be easy enough to rewrite, say, find_last_component
>> using cp_find_first_component. The only reason why I didn't do
>> that (other than laziness) was that then I'd want to go figure out
>> a situation where find_last_component actually gets called, to make
>> sure I didn't make a boneheaded mistake while doing so, and I
>> didn't feel like doing that. But I'll definitely add a FIXME
>> comment about that?
> OK. find_last_component gets called for dealing with stub methods, if
> I recall correctly why I wrote it.
Yes, that's right. And all I know about them is that I just spent an
afternoon investigating a bug dealing with them, didn't succeed in
fixing the bug, and felt dirty afterwards.
>> Do any demanglers put in spaces after 'operator'? I hope not...
> I thought one of them did, but I might have been mistaken.
You could easily be right: I haven't done a lot of GCC v2 checking.
I'll look into that, and, if so, add a guard for a possible extra
space in cp_find_first_component. (Otherwise, the gdb_assert in
cp_find_first_component could leave people unable to load C++ files
with certain constructs mixing templates and operators.) Not that
there's any justification for having the different demanglers
producing different output, but that's another issue entirely...
David Carlton
carlton at math dot stanford dot edu