On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Sterling Augustine <saugust...@google.com> wrote:
> Do you have a suggestion for fixing the disagreement? I would love to > add this as a parameter somewhere, but the decision is very deep in > the internals of the pretty printer. I disagree with your characterization that the pretty-printer is ad-hoc. Since its inception, I chose to follow closely the established C++ style as previously explained. The pretty printer was designed as a tool for diagnostics to users, not for the demangler. If the demangler happens to find some of its functionalities useful, the proper action would be to customize it as opposed to a whole change to satisfy its internals. A way of doing this is to have the pretty-printer object initialized with a style (e.g. standard C++ style, gdb style, etc.). The places you want to change should be predicated on the current style matching gdb style, etc. -- Gaby
