Re: [PATCH] Start abstraction of C++ abi's

[Daniel Berlin <dberlin at redhat dot com>]

Michael Elizabeth Chastain <chastain@cygnus.com> writes:

> Hi Daniel,
> 
> > I can make it strncmp, or just check method_name[1], but it doesn't
> > make sense otherwise. It's just seeing if the first letter is a "~" in
> > the actual demangled method name, rather than the mangled name.
> 
> Ah, ok.  I was wondering why it wasn't part of destructor_prefix_p.

Yeah. I plan on renaming the functions, so that it conveys what it's
really doing, but not until i'm far enough along in the rest of the
abstraction, since some might just go away completely, abstracted into
themselves (IE we might only need this really for the v2 abi), or done
away with in favor of better methods.

In order to minimize the code changes for the moment, so i had a
better chance of getting it approved quickly, I only made a few of the
macros (VTBL_PREFIX_P, DESTRUCTOR_PREFIX_P) into functions, added a
function for something that should have been at least a macro
(constructor prefixes, we had the same damn code copied everywhere,
and it was only somewhat right in a few places), and made it work for
both ABI's. I didn't rename anything, i just lowercased them. :)