Ping? http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-08/msg01626.html
-cary On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 5:57 PM, Cary Coutant <ccout...@google.com> wrote: >> OK, thanks. Dmitry G. also commented that the patch does not work "for >> `_Z3fooi.1988' or `_Z3fooi.part.9.165493.constprop.775.31805'." >> Apparently, there can be multiple numeric suffixes, and a cloned >> function can be cloned again. Is it worth trying to identify the kinds >> of cloning in the demangled name, or should I just look for a generic >> pattern instead? > > Here's an updated patch that generalizes the clone suffix pattern recognition. > > Does this look OK for trunk? > > I've bootstrapped and regression tested on x86_64. > > -cary > > > 2011-08-19 Cary Coutant <ccout...@google.com> > > * include/demangle.h (enum demangle_component_type): > * libiberty/cp-demangle.c (struct d_info): > (CP_STATIC_IF_GLIBCPP_V3): > (struct d_print_info): > * libiberty/testsuite/demangle-expected (DFA): > > include/ChangeLog: > > PR 40831 > * demangle.h (enum demangle_component_type): Add > DEMANGLE_COMPONENT_CLONE. > > libiberty/ChangeLog: > > PR 40831 > * cp-demangle.c (d_make_comp): Add new component type. > (cplus_demangle_mangled_name): Check for clone suffixes. > (d_parmlist): Don't error out if we see '.'. > (d_clone_suffix): New function. > (d_print_comp): Print info for clone suffixes. > * testsuite/demangle-expected: Add new testcases. >
