http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40831
Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2011.01.06 14:07:31
CC| |dj at redhat dot com,
| |hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |ian at airs dot com
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Severity|normal |enhancement
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-01-06
14:07:31 UTC ---
We certainly can improve libiberty demangler to handle the cloning suffixes.
It would not hurt and is certainly nice thing to have. I am not terribly
familiar with demnagler implementation so I would preffer someone else to do
it.
Concerning question how _ZN1C3fooEi.isra.0. should be demangled, I think we
already use english sentences for some functions names like "static constructor
keyed to XYZ", so probably we can go "C::foo(int) isra clone 0" or we even can
go further and expand the abbrebiated names GCC use for different types of
clones.
For most of purposes however the tools should use debug info that contains the
correct link back to original function...
Marking as enhancement request and adding our libiberty maintainers into CC.
