Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2012 00:21:32 -0800 From: Rui Paulo <rpaulo@felyko.com> To: Navdeep Parhar <nparhar@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Roman Divacky <rdivacky@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: clang mangling some static struct names? Message-ID: <8E25C29E-D751-444B-8E16-4625A50BC165@felyko.com> In-Reply-To: <50A6B85F.6090707@gmail.com> References: <50A6A3BD.5000901@gmail.com> <20121116214919.GA41725@freebsd.org> <50A6B85F.6090707@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 16 Nov 2012, at 14:04, Navdeep Parhar <nparhar@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/16/12 13:49, Roman Divacky wrote:
>> Yes, it does that. iirc so that you can have things like
>>=20
>> void foo(int cond) {
>> if (cond) {
>> static int i =3D 7;
>> } else {
>> static int i =3D 8;
>> }
>> }
>>=20
>> working correctly.
>=20
> It's not appending the .n everywhere. And when it does, I don't see =
any
> potential collision that it prevented by doing so. Instead, it looks
> like the .n symbol corresponds to the nth element in the structure (so
> this is not name mangling in the true sense). I just don't see the
> point in doing things this way. It is only making things harder for
> debuggers.
It's likely that FreeBSD's gdb has to grow support for this new symbol =
format. Have you tried using the newest gdb available from ports?=20
Regards,
--
Rui Paulo
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8E25C29E-D751-444B-8E16-4625A50BC165>