public inbox for gcc-prs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu>
To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
Subject: Re: c++/5390: Libiberty fails to demangle multi-digit template parameters.
Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2003 16:06:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030307160600.26558.qmail@sources.redhat.com> (raw)

The following reply was made to PR c++/5390; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu>
To: Carlo Wood <carlo@alinoe.com>
Cc: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, <gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: c++/5390: Libiberty fails to demangle multi-digit template
 parameters.
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 10:03:32 -0600 (CST)

 Carlo,
 first this: When I complained that this PR has been sitting idle despite 
 the fact that it has a patch, I complained to the ones who are in power of 
 reviewing and applying patches. That it has not been reviewed is not your 
 fault. We are grateful for people sending in patches, and I, too, am 
 embarrassed if we turn them down by just not taking notice of their 
 work...
 
 > > State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback
 > > State-Changed-Why:
 > >     Carlo, this report has been sitting idly for a year now.
 > >     What is the present state? Is it still unsolved, or did
 > >     your patch go in?
 > [...]
 > 
 > c++filt of 3.3 does not demangle the correct mangled names (at least the
 > ones I tried) - while it does demangle the old (wrong) mangled names. 
 
 As time progresses, this is becoming more and more irrelevant: as far 
 as I understand you,
 - gcc since 3.0 has a different mangling scheme, which isn't concerned in 
   this PR 
 - gcc up to 2.95 has never generated the cases that your patch addresses
 - gcc 2.95 is certainly not going to be fixed to generate them any more
 - gcc 2.95 is slowly dying out.
 
 The question thus is: if people are not overly interested in your patch 
 (which is regrettable, but apparently the case), then we can as well close 
 the PR. Since if we don't, we'll ask the same question again in a year, 
 and then people will care even less about 2.95.
 
 What's your opinion on this?
 
 Thanks
   Wolfgang
 
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Wolfgang Bangerth             email:            bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu
                               www: http://www.ticam.utexas.edu/~bangerth/
 
 


             reply	other threads:[~2003-03-07 16:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-03-07 16:06 Wolfgang Bangerth [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-03-11 20:06 DJ Delorie
2003-03-11 20:06 Wolfgang Bangerth
2003-03-11  2:26 Carlo Wood
2003-03-10 21:06 Wolfgang Bangerth
2003-03-07 23:16 Carlo Wood
2003-03-07 17:26 DJ Delorie
2003-03-07 12:36 Carlo Wood
2003-03-07  2:26 bangerth

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20030307160600.26558.qmail@sources.redhat.com \
    --to=bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu \
    --cc=gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=nobody@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).