From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-vk1-xa34.google.com (mail-vk1-xa34.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::a34]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB3C1382A6ED for ; Fri, 27 May 2022 18:31:38 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org DB3C1382A6ED Received: by mail-vk1-xa34.google.com with SMTP id i25so2374829vkr.8 for ; Fri, 27 May 2022 11:31:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=FuxwGTGxADJZ0DECVBORf9XBdAQtV4AI5bUJxxwkQ3o=; b=Jr1IOrahBcjPpA19hL7Q8w+2XVaxjhxc5QC82uuTR16o5DlKjEARQi+6BrLGXUp+Ai Vegs0qIPDEJNkmFa8rNwzzJX26XkMvzVbH4slNE35HahzZSdVFI0oStJSIPLBQHfMZwW CFj7CCkqhTD8yG0YVUALEcg/sbbrD2UhkoI0Z089mN1nEGdRgEV3iX82JGJMqjZ6lOH3 hpj6EkTV2qB2wRn3AB4oj6Vkx0xpcA5zuFfuz3GOG3BYsMDVDie8WjkRUi+U4xOtmY2M CqlYjEuEtzZpaS65KWNkijkSz9xkULBdnWiaE3lsLkjRtVzTyBBUsye96iIXq0il2Do3 MsBA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5335oi1bmBVYLSvRpm82bAh7Q2K+5N6az+Ti4lQBVx7mAlBxSZ9A ELjEXjtpWeo3hzB/VpnQMuK1zSkl0jTAH+XIYM87/6yDr4A= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw2oza2hVmhhOHY+GXrJnlfy9VzRXuVd1X6urOGsrvrQkn5oDhVsrQpN7HS46afMEVPurCC+NStkB0WB7tyR58= X-Received: by 2002:a1f:9f07:0:b0:358:adf7:40ab with SMTP id i7-20020a1f9f07000000b00358adf740abmr3689550vke.12.1653676298251; Fri, 27 May 2022 11:31:38 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <54be8f6f-7164-ec40-c327-801e3ba80266@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <54be8f6f-7164-ec40-c327-801e3ba80266@gnu.org> From: Eric Gallager Date: Fri, 27 May 2022 14:31:27 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: libiberty: Would it be reasonable to add support for GnuCOBOL function name demangling? To: Simon Sobisch Cc: gcc-patches Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL, KAM_SHORT, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 May 2022 18:31:40 -0000 On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 3:17 AM Simon Sobisch via Gcc-patches wrote: > > Hi fellow hackers, > > first of all: I'm not sure if this is the correct mailing list for this > question, but I did not found a separate one and > gnu.org/software/libiberty redirects to > https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libiberty.pdf - so I'm here. > If there's a better place for this: please drop a note. > > I've never "worked" with libiberty directly but am sure I'm using it > quite regularly with various tools including GDB and valgrind. > Therefore I currently cannot send a patch for the function name > demangling, but if this is a reasonable thing to add I'd like to work on > this with someone. > > As noted: the first question is: is it reasonable to add support for > GnuCOBOL? > > * How would the demangler know it is to be called? Just "best match" > (GnuCOBOL modules always have some symbols in it which should be > available if there is any debugging information in, if that helps)? > * Giving the work of gcc-cobol which was discussed on this mailing list > some months ago (not sure about its current state) there possibly will > be a COBOL support be "integrated" - with possibly different name > mangling. But still - GnuCOBOL is used "in the wild" (for production > environments) since years (and will be for many years to come, both > based on GCC and with other compilers) and the name mangling rules did > not change. > If the plan is to integrate GnuCOBOL into trunk, then I'd say adding demangling support for it to libiberty would not only be reasonable, but also a necessary prerequisite for merging the rest of it. > A second question would be: Is there anyone who would be willing to work > on this with me? > Where would "we" or I start? > > Thank you for taking the time to read and possibly answer, > Simon Sobisch > > Maintainer GnuCOBOL > >