On 12/4/18 11:56 AM, Nick Clifton wrote:
OK, revised (v5) patch attached. Is this version acceptable to all ?
Looks good to me. Independently, do you see a reason not to disable the old demangler entirely?
Jason
- Re: [PATCH] Set DEMANGLE_RECURSION_LIMIT ... Pedro Alves
- Re: [PATCH] Set DEMANGLE_RECURSION_LIMIT ... Nick Clifton
- Re: [PATCH] Set DEMANGLE_RECURSION_LIMIT ... Jakub Jelinek
- Re: [PATCH] Set DEMANGLE_RECURSION_LIMIT ... Nick Clifton
- Re: [PATCH] Set DEMANGLE_RECURSION_LIMIT ... Jakub Jelinek
- Re: [PATCH] Set DEMANGLE_RECURSION_LIMIT ... Ian Lance Taylor via gcc-patches
- Re: [PATCH] Set DEMANGLE_RECURSION_LIMIT ... Jakub Jelinek
- Re: [PATCH] Set DEMANGLE_RECURSION_LIMIT ... Jason Merrill
- Re: [PATCH] Set DEMANGLE_RECURSION_LIMIT ... David Malcolm
- Re: [PATCH] Set DEMANGLE_RECURSION_LIMIT ... Nick Clifton
- Re: RFA/RFC: Add stack recursion limit to... Jason Merrill
- RFC: libiberty PATCH to disable demanglin... Jason Merrill
- Re: RFC: libiberty PATCH to disable deman... Nick Clifton
- Re: RFC: libiberty PATCH to disable deman... Jakub Jelinek
- Re: RFC: libiberty PATCH to disable deman... Pedro Alves
- Re: RFC: libiberty PATCH to disable deman... Tom Tromey
- Re: RFC: libiberty PATCH to disable deman... Jason Merrill
- Re: RFC: libiberty PATCH to disable deman... Simon Marchi
- Re: RFC: libiberty PATCH to disable deman... Nick Clifton
- Re: RFC: libiberty PATCH to disable deman... Richard Biener
- Re: RFC: libiberty PATCH to disable deman... Jason Merrill
