Re: [rfc] lookups with natural/linkage names

["Paul N. Hilfinger" <hilfingr at otisco dot mckusick dot com>]

> > What exactly is the reasoning that says that such lookups needn't consider
> > local (or rather non-static/global) symbols?
> 
> Normally, symbols with a linkage name (i.e. that appear in the minsym
> table) are only global or static.  Does Ada have an exception to this?

Not exactly, but actually I am not specifically talking about Ada here.
The equation

	linkage name == minsym name

worries me a little.  The only alterative names to linkage names are
natural names (I'll ignore print names for now).  Therefore, the only
possible kind of mangled name is a minsym name.

Are nested function names ever mangled?  We seldom consider nested functions,
because they don't occur in official C/C++, but they do occur in GCC's 
extensions (and in Pascal and Ada).  On IRIX, using Dwarf-2, nested function
names do NOT appear in the minimal symbols (whereas on Linux, they do). 
I hope you see why this makes me slightly nervous.

Now, it is true that Ada mangles more stuff (in particular, type names), 
but since we never look up demangled names, this is actually somewhat less
of an issue for us.

Paul Hilfinger