From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-491871-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 75355 invoked by alias); 7 Dec 2018 11:37:00 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 75308 invoked by uid 89); 7 Dec 2018 11:36:59 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-spam-relays-external:209.85.208.193, H*RU:209.85.208.193
X-HELO: mail-lj1-f193.google.com
Received: from mail-lj1-f193.google.com (HELO mail-lj1-f193.google.com) (209.85.208.193) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 07 Dec 2018 11:36:58 +0000
Received: by mail-lj1-f193.google.com with SMTP id k19-v6so3239156lji.11;        Fri, 07 Dec 2018 03:36:58 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;        d=gmail.com; s=20161025;        h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to         :cc;        bh=HjKiAjlvv3tUpiMW+9wdM/qY0ma4Hs6HAid01jUoh1U=;        b=Oz4qvThrCg8Q97Jgdkc9Fqnr60nbChESYOXHVrKb190DzSCbbJdDqEAoRX1ARuPY7v         MHxU/bKT98SruSLeSkhGxXSJCxaAUn9H49HuAc0wsSJ49BzdgXmMIrUonxjZ+rkpcMIT         eg51WpM053ktOFdwseG6JIk+6w1ymSdtbkFn/JsRprHWgpvTrUPG5PRueJrUNrLfWJJx         gc4ru3UZUt5pEBRauQoqLfSN7FvWo7ayNol2fFMffhny059KfTeVLX5ROJPOxKHvv7wy         wfhtQwKnn/7TIAo6W0QQKZghhk+Z6dvB6aZL+8gPMlGsWvKZNA7GtpQX4q4B8U7wB/Ih         +6UA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <87muprdko7.fsf@redhat.com> <20181130084211.GX12380@tucnak> <173817ca-0aa0-e1a2-6725-37e079ead545@redhat.com> <m3woousm8n.fsf@pepe.airs.com> <20181130140330.GA12380@tucnak> <fa1abe9c-7545-6a48-cbf0-97b993345523@redhat.com> <CAFiYyc1gTSXgSiJSFKEWaE0UTGbi45-mWHKJnUb4Wvjp86bbFQ@mail.gmail.com> <460cb971-0e21-1e3e-4920-8b3ee7290cf7@redhat.com> <CAKOQZ8zspME4gzoRw4xgFcShoqeUfp_e=Og=4S-yKn4EehokeA@mail.gmail.com> <736e8303-b724-f96d-54f5-46bff99fa34d@redhat.com> <57d33aa7-4e37-a09c-4bdc-974b5f654d33@redhat.com> <c7c959ca-b8bf-bd3e-a65d-bb274a3118d3@redhat.com> <2928eac9-9363-ddb8-21eb-df878d2d4837@redhat.com> <CADzB+2n6kz=9zLzordWp3gqW+hrLHBhQJ-5p5Lt8Stqv97=nBw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADzB+2n6kz=9zLzordWp3gqW+hrLHBhQJ-5p5Lt8Stqv97=nBw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2018 11:37:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAFiYyc1cvVBsv=_cPkw4Up=axBJTbjpgmC8a-1waq0biejW3Xw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: libiberty PATCH to disable demangling of ancient mangling schemes
To: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
Cc: Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com>, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>, 	Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>, matz@gcc.gnu.org, sgayou@redhat.com, 	tom@tromey.com, GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>, 	Binutils <binutils@sourceware.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2018-12/txt/msg00445.txt.bz2

On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 10:22 PM Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 11:14 AM Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > Looks good to me.  Independently, do you see a reason not to disable the
> > old demangler entirely?
>
> Like so.  Does anyone object to this?  These mangling schemes haven't
> been relevant in decades.

Why #ifdef the code?  Just rip it out?

Richard.