This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: C++ Demangling
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich at suse dot com>
- To: kamlesh kumar <kamleshbhalui at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com>, Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com>, binutils at sourceware dot org
- Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 10:24:18 +0200
- Subject: Re: C++ Demangling
- References: <CABKRkggRfTrq5apsX=EBH3coQba5S2mOXZb9SF6PvgeFRgtAtQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 11.10.2019 09:16, kamlesh kumar wrote:
> Hi Devs,
>
> I am looking into this bug
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84950
>
> I could see that
>
> $cat test
> _Q.__0
> $c++filt < test
> ::Q.(void)
> $c++filt -v
> GNU c++filt (GNU Binutils) 2.30
> =================================
>
> With trunk c++filt
>
> $c++filt < test
> _Q.__0
> $c++filt -v
> GNU c++filt (GNU Binutils) 2.32
>
> I am going through the demangling/mangling docs.
> and like to know
> which demangled name above is wrong ?
According to
2018-12-22 Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
Remove support for demangling GCC 2.x era mangling schemes.
* cplus-dem.c: Remove cplus_mangle_opname, cplus_demangle_opname,
internal_cplus_demangle, and all subroutines.
(libiberty_demanglers): Remove entries for ancient GNU (pre-3.0),
Lucid, ARM, HP, and EDG demangling styles.
(cplus_demangle): Remove 'work' variable. Don't call
internal_cplus_demangle.
demangling support for this old mangling scheme was simply removed.
Jan