Re: [rfa] Add SYMBOL_SET_LINKAGE_NAME

[Elena Zannoni <ezannoni at redhat dot com>]

Daniel Jacobowitz writes:
 > Because the cleaner interface is not my goal - it's a side goal to my
 > actual aims, which are improved GDB startup time and memory usage. 

>From your previous postings I understand is that your cplusplus stuff
has a noticeable impact on performance and memory usage and you are
trying to shave gdb's time and size wherever there is a chance. From
Paul's postings instead I get the impression that he needs to revise
the current interface.

You are saying that you are not willing to take a step back and look
at things from a broader perspective.  I sincerely hope I
misunderstood your statement.

The symbol table is already a mess, with multiple redundant
interfaces.  At the moment there isn't a clear picture of what various
bits of gdb need from the symbol table.  How do we know the direction
we are going is improving things generally across the board?  How can
we know that, if this is not the case, the impact is not too heavy on
other parts and we can live with the tradeoff?

I am not saying that we have to know everything in minutious details
before we can touch the code (that's very likely totally unfeasible),
but at least, have an understanding of the big picture and the
consequences.