Re: [RFC] Initial pass at supporting the Go language

[Keith Seitz <keiths at redhat dot com>]

On 01/02/2012 11:13 AM, Tom Tromey wrote:
> > > > > > "Doug" == Doug Evans<dje@google.com>  writes:
> Doug>  +	 And if not, it should be clearly documented why not.
> Doug>  +	 OTOH, why are we demangling at all here?
> Doug>  +	 new_symbol_full assumes we return the mangled name.
> Doug>  +	 I realize things are changing in this area, I just forget how.  */
> Doug>  +      if (cu->language == language_go)
> Doug>  +	{
> Doug>  +#if 0
> Doug>  +	  demangled = cu->language_defn->la_demangle (mangled, 0);
> Doug>  +#else
> Doug>  +	  /* This is a lie, but we already lie to the caller new_symbol_full.
> Doug>  +	     This just undoes that lie until things are cleaned up.  */
> Doug>  +	  demangled = NULL;
> Doug>  +#endif
>
> I've CC'd Keith to see if he can clear this up.

I'm not sure what the question is...

This is the workaround to demangle DW_AT_[MIPS_]linkage_name if 
available instead of computing the physname. It should only be done for 
C++ and Java.

Did you want me to do something? Or ?

Keith