From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17483 invoked by alias); 15 Jul 2003 19:02:09 -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 17473 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2003 19:02:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (66.30.197.194) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 15 Jul 2003 19:02:08 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69C2B2B7F; Tue, 15 Jul 2003 15:01:57 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3F144FA5.5060102@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 19:02:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030223 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gabriel Dos Reis Cc: Nathanael Nerode , gdb@sources.redhat.com, hjl@lucon.org Subject: Re: FYI: A new C++ demangler References: <20030712180228.GA912@doctormoo> <3F142933.1060902@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-07/txt/msg00166.txt.bz2 > Andrew Cagney wrote: > | However, there is the SIM directory ..... > > Yes. Apparently Nathanael doesn't seem to understand that C++ > can be used productively for system programming. Er? > Nathanael Nerode wrote > | > We *don't* want to add such a build requirement for GCC or binutils, > | > for very good reasons (a lot of systems don't ship with a C++ > | > compiler). HJ keeps proposing a *completely* demented idea, which > | > is that the new demangler will be used if a C++ compiler happens to > | > be lying around during build, and otherwise the broken demangler > | > will be used. I wish he'd see what's wrong with that picture.