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>