This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: C++ Demangling
- From: kamlesh kumar <kamleshbhalui at gmail dot com>
- To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich at suse 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 14:15:18 +0530
- Subject: Re: C++ Demangling
- References: <CABKRkggRfTrq5apsX=EBH3coQba5S2mOXZb9SF6PvgeFRgtAtQ@mail.gmail.com> <35923c7d-2ca6-49b7-c744-d1d04ded0729@suse.com>
Thank you Jan.
On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 1:54 PM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote:
> 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
>