Re: Fwd: Two possible function stabs patches

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at redhat dot com>]

> Oops!  Forgot to attach the actual patches.  Fixed below.
>
>
> OK, so I have not one, but two patches!

Um, these appear to come with a little history (Solaris perhaphs?).  Can 
you provide a bit of a background?  You'll likely also want to add 
something to the GNU stabs document found in the GDB distro.

> The first one is less interesting.  It uses the language's name for the function, unless it's a C++ function, in which case it uses the (mangled) assembler name.  It'll give a stab like
>
>         .stabs  "__ZN3bar3fooEv:F(0,1)",36,0,2,__ZN3bar3fooEv
> or
>         .stabs  "foo:F(0,1)",36,0,2,foo.11
>
> The second one uses the 'printable name' for the function.  That is, for C it's just the name, and for C++ it's the demangled version of its name.  I am not at all sure it'll work, because it gives stabs like:
>
>         .stabs  "int bar::foo():F(0,1)",36,0,2,__ZN3bar3fooEv
>
> which I suspect can't be parsed.
>
> Could someone help me test these?  It needs a machine that can use stabs and on which the GDB testsuite doesn't give too many false positives. 

I'd strongly encourage you to install GNU/Linux and *BSD on a couple 
local old/slow Mac boxes.  It will make testing a lot easier.

enjoy,
Andrew