From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29983 invoked by alias); 22 Oct 2011 15:19:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 29974 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Oct 2011 15:19:15 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (216.239.44.51) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 22 Oct 2011 15:19:01 +0000 Received: from wpaz9.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz9.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.73]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id p9MFJ0fX020177 for ; Sat, 22 Oct 2011 08:19:00 -0700 Received: from pzk2 (pzk2.prod.google.com [10.243.19.130]) by wpaz9.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id p9MFI24I010574 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Sat, 22 Oct 2011 08:18:59 -0700 Received: by pzk2 with SMTP id 2so17920908pzk.4 for ; Sat, 22 Oct 2011 08:18:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.156.1 with SMTP id wa1mr35478511pbb.58.1319296739430; Sat, 22 Oct 2011 08:18:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.156.1 with SMTP id wa1mr35478492pbb.58.1319296739324; Sat, 22 Oct 2011 08:18:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from coign.google.com ([216.129.97.197]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ko15sm43388242pbb.9.2011.10.22.08.18.58 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 22 Oct 2011 08:18:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Ian Lance Taylor To: Marc Glisse Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Ping: demangle C++ extern "C" functions References: Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2011 17:51:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Marc Glisse's message of "Sat, 22 Oct 2011 09:06:00 +0200 (CEST)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-System-Of-Record: true X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2011-10/txt/msg02070.txt.bz2 Marc Glisse writes: > g++ doesn't currently generate those, but I would like to change that > (c++/2316). And nothing prevents another compiler from actually > implementing the itanium C++ ABI (this code is mostly for binutils if > I understand correctly). > > I thought it made sense to submit independent pieces first, but if it > is preferable to wait until everything is ready (not soon) I > understand. Independent pieces is fine. I just wanted to make sure there was some reason for it. Ian