On Nov 6, 2011, at 11:04 PM, Sharad Singhai wrote:
> Sorry about the delay. I have updated the patch to output demangled
> names under a new option (-m) and added a test case.
I like it, now you just need a gcov type person to like it. :-)
Sorry about the delay. I have updated the patch to output demangled
names under a new option (-m) and added a test case. Okay for trunk?
Sharad
2011-11-06 Sharad Singhai
* doc/gcov.texi: Document gcov intermediate format.
* gcov.c (print_usage): Handle new option.
(pr
On Oct 19, 2011, at 12:12 PM, Sharad Singhai wrote:
> Sorry, I misunderstood your comment. I see that you are asking for
> unmangled function names whereas the current patch supports only
> mangled names. I can print unmangled names under another option. Would
> that work?
I defer to the person t
Sorry, I misunderstood your comment. I see that you are asking for
unmangled function names whereas the current patch supports only
mangled names. I can print unmangled names under another option. Would
that work?
Thanks,
Sharad
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Sharad Singhai wrote:
> Since the
Since the updated patch already uses unmangled function names, is it
good to commit then?
Sharad
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 1:48 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>> On Oct 18, 2011, at 4:19 PM, Sharad Singhai wrote:
>> > Okay, I liked the idea of self-descriptive tags. I have updated the
>> > patch based on
> On Oct 18, 2011, at 4:19 PM, Sharad Singhai wrote:
> > Okay, I liked the idea of self-descriptive tags. I have updated the
> > patch based on your suggestions. I have simplified the format
> > somewhat. Instead of repeating function name, I use a 'function' tag
> > with the format
> >
> > funct
On Oct 18, 2011, at 4:19 PM, Sharad Singhai wrote:
> Okay, I liked the idea of self-descriptive tags. I have updated the
> patch based on your suggestions. I have simplified the format
> somewhat. Instead of repeating function name, I use a 'function' tag
> with the format
>
> function:,,
Sound
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Mike Stump wrote:
>
> On Oct 5, 2011, at 12:47 AM, Sharad Singhai wrote:
> > This patch adds an intermediate coverage format (enabled via 'gcov
> > -i'). This is a compact format as it does not require source files.
>
> I don't like any of the tags, I think if you s
On Oct 5, 2011, at 12:47 AM, Sharad Singhai wrote:
> This patch adds an intermediate coverage format (enabled via 'gcov
> -i'). This is a compact format as it does not require source files.
I don't like any of the tags, I think if you showed them to 100 people that had
used gcov before, very few
Sorry about the badly formatted mail. Here is another version with a
different mailer. -Sharad
This patch was earlier submitted to google/main, but I propose it
for the trunk as well.
This patch adds an intermediate coverage format (enabled via 'gcov
-i'). This is a compact format as it does
Sorry about the garbled message. My mistake with the mailer. Here
is what I really intended to send.
This patch was earlier submitted to google/main, but I propose itfor
trunk as well.
This patch adds an intermediate coverage format (enabled via
'gcov-i'). This is a compact format as it does
This patch was earlier submitted to google/main, but I propose itfor
the trunk as well.
This patch adds an intermediate coverage format (enabled via
'gcov-i'). This is a compact format as it does not require source
files.
The new option ('gcov -i') outputs .gcov files in an intermediate
textformat
12 matches
Mail list logo
