This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [rfa] annotate blocks with C++ namespace information


On Mon, Apr 14, 2003 at 02:33:03PM -0700, David Carlton wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Apr 2003 15:27:05 -0400, Elena Zannoni <ezannoni at redhat dot com> said:
> > David Carlton writes:
> 
> >> Just for reference, here's a slightly updated version of my namespace
> >> patch, following Daniel's suggestions.  The only real change is that
> >> it adds a new command "maint cplus first_component" and a new file
> >> gdb.c++/maint.exp to test it.
> 
> > Ok, I got around to this finally.  It is basically ok, except for the
> > line between what is c++ and what is symbol table stuff. I think that
> > more stuff can be pushed into cp-support.c. See below...
> 
> I have mixed feelings about your comments. My first reaction was the
> 'using_list' stuff more logically belongs in buildsym.c: it's about
> building a symtab, after all!  So if the only reason to move it to
> cp-support is to shift the maintenance responsibilities (which is
> sensible enough, no need for you to look at changes that only affect
> C++ support), then I'd rather fix the maintenance process: make Daniel
> a symtab maintainer (he's certainly done enough work on symtabs), or
> at least allow him to approve C++-specific symtab changes.
> 
> Having said that, I'm tentatively coming around to your point of view.
> After all, it's easy enough for me to say that everything related to
> building symtabs should be in buildsym.c, but if lots of different
> languages develop their own special needs for the symbol table, then
> buildsym.c will quickly degenerate into a mess of language-specific
> special cases.  So maybe you're right.  And, after all, cp-support.c
> is a lot smaller than buildsym.c, so it will be a while before it gets
> too bloated.
> 
> Daniel, what do you think?

I can see it either way - in symtab or in C++.  Does it make sense to
have cp-namespace.c for this, do you think?


-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]