On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 9:36 AM, Diego Novillo <dnovi...@google.com> wrote:
> On 12-06-12 11:58 , Sterling Augustine wrote:
>
>> +/* Wrap lang_decl_name with options appropriate for dwarf. */
>> +
>> +const char *
>> +lang_decl_dwarf_name (tree decl, int v, bool translate)
>> +{
>> + const char *name;
>> + /* Curiously, reinit_cxx_pp doesn't reset the flags field, so setting
>> the flag
>> + here will be adequate to get the desired behaviour. */
>> + pp_c_base (cxx_pp)->flags |= pp_c_flag_gnu_v3;
>> + name = lang_decl_name (decl, v, translate);
>> + /* Subsequent calls to the pretty printer shouldn't use this style. */
>> + pp_c_base (cxx_pp)->flags&= ~pp_c_flag_gnu_v3;
>> + return name;
>> +}
>
>
> Would it make sense to factor common code in decl_as_dwarf_string()?
The wrapper code is the same, but the internal call is
not--"lang_decl_name" and "decl_as_string" return different strings,
and their interface is different so it wouldn't be easy to pass a
function pointer.
So, I'm not sure how you would combine the code without it getting more ugly.
Sterling
