From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3846 invoked by alias); 24 May 2003 08:11:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 3816 invoked from network); 24 May 2003 08:11:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO otisco.McKusick.COM) (209.31.233.190) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 24 May 2003 08:11:25 -0000 Received: (from hilfingr@localhost) by otisco.McKusick.COM (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h4O8BJu10644; Sat, 24 May 2003 01:11:19 -0700 Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 08:11:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200305240811.h4O8BJu10644@otisco.McKusick.COM> From: "Paul N. Hilfinger" To: carlton@bactrian.org CC: gdb@sources.redhat.com, ezannoni@redhat.com, jimb@redhat.com, drow@mvista.com In-reply-to: (message from David Carlton on Fri, 23 May 2003 16:48:14 -0700) Subject: Re: [rfc] lookups with natural/linkage names Reply-to: Hilfinger@otisco.mckusick.com References: X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00336.txt.bz2 > * Add a function > struct symbol *lookup_symbol_linkage (const char *name); > that looks up the symbol whose linkage name is NAME. It only looks > up global or static symbols (with preference to the former), and > only looks up symbols in VAR_DOMAIN; it doesn't apply any > language-specific rules. This will, for example, give us a reliable > way to find the symbol associated to a minsym, no matter how > complicated C++ lookup rules make things. David, What exactly is the reasoning that says that such lookups needn't consider local (or rather non-static/global) symbols? Paul