On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 05:55:46PM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> On Nov 13 2020, Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
> > +static void
> > +demangle_const_char (struct rust_demangler *rdm)
> > +{
> > + size_t hex_len;
> > + uint64_t value;
> > +
> > + hex_len = parse_hex_nibbles (rdm, );
>
On Nov 13 2020, Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches wrote:
> +static void
> +demangle_const_char (struct rust_demangler *rdm)
> +{
> + size_t hex_len;
> + uint64_t value;
> +
> + hex_len = parse_hex_nibbles (rdm, );
> +
> + if (hex_len == 0 || hex_len > 8)
> +{
> + rdm->errored = 1;
> +
Hi everyone,
Apologies again for the delay on my end, the past few weeks have been hectic
and exhausting.
The changes look good and pass the testing I was doing for my version of the
patch.
Feel free to commit Nikhil's latest patch for us.
Thanks,
- Eddy B.
On Fri, Nov 13, 2020, at 08:42,
On 11/6/20 12:09 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
So I think the best path forward is to let you and Eduard-Mihai make the
technical decisions about what bits are ready for the trunk. When y'all
think something is ready, let's go ahead and get it installed and
iterate on things that aren't quite ready yet.
On 11/1/20 10:26 AM, Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
>
> On 11/1/20 6:57 AM, Eduard-Mihai Burtescu wrote:
>> Reading the diff patch, the v0 changes look great. I wouldn't be too
>> worried
>> about the "printable character" aspect, there are similar
>> Unicode-related
>> issues
On 11/1/20 6:57 AM, Eduard-Mihai Burtescu wrote:
Reading the diff patch, the v0 changes look great. I wouldn't be too worried
about the "printable character" aspect, there are similar Unicode-related
issues elsewhere, e.g. the "non-control ASCII" comment in decode_legacy_escape
(I suppose we
Reading the diff patch, the v0 changes look great. I wouldn't be too worried
about the "printable character" aspect, there are similar Unicode-related
issues elsewhere, e.g. the "non-control ASCII" comment in decode_legacy_escape
(I suppose we could make it also go through the "print a non-control
On 10/29/20 12:16 AM, Nikhil Benesch wrote:
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 7:53 PM Eduard-Mihai Burtescu wrote:
I agree that landing the extra changes later on top should be fine anyway,
though when I make the sprintf -> snprintf change, I could provide the extra
changes as well (either as a
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 7:53 PM Eduard-Mihai Burtescu wrote:
> I agree that landing the extra changes later on top should be fine anyway,
> though when I make the sprintf -> snprintf change, I could provide the extra
> changes as well (either as a combined patch, or as a second tiny patch).
>
>
Hi Ian,
Thanks for replying! (Also I'm really sorry for the missing hard wrapping
in my earlier email, I shouldn't have sent that from my phone)
Regarding this being a blocker: we've already made the changes to Rust, and
the new ("v0") mangling format continues to remain opt-in and nightly-only,
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 3:22 PM Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> I think it is mostly a matter of snagging some of Ian's limited time.
> I suspect it is still worthwhile to try to get the original patch
> reviewed and merged, because then any follow-up changes for const
> generics
I think it is mostly a matter of snagging some of Ian's limited time.
I suspect it is still worthwhile to try to get the original patch
reviewed and merged, because then any follow-up changes for const
generics support will be smaller and easier to review.
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 5:48 PM
FWIW, the patch has become slightly outdated compared to the Rust upstream, so
if someone wants to review it I should prepare a new version.
The changes would be for the MVP version of "const generics" (Rust's equivalent
to C++ templates with value parameters, enabling e.g. types like
On 10/28/20 5:22 PM, Nikhil Benesch wrote:
Ian, are you able to review this? I saw that you reviewed many of the
prior changes to the Rust demangler.
If not, can you suggest someone who can?
Thanks very much.
Nikhil
I seem to have failed to convince my email client to set the appropriate
Ian, are you able to review this? I saw that you reviewed many of the
prior changes to the Rust demangler.
If not, can you suggest someone who can?
Thanks very much.
Nikhil
Ping 4: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-March/542012.html
Thanks,
- Eddy B.
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020, at 05:52, Eduard-Mihai Burtescu wrote:
> Ping 3: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-March/542012.html
>
> Thanks,
> - Eddy B.
>
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2020, at 00:52,
Ping 3: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-March/542012.html
Thanks,
- Eddy B.
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020, at 00:52, Eduard-Mihai Burtescu wrote:
> Ping 2: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-March/542012.html
>
> Thanks,
> - Eddy B.
>
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2020, at 10:28 PM,
Ping 2: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-March/542012.html
Thanks,
- Eddy B.
On Fri, Mar 13, 2020, at 10:28 PM, Eduard-Mihai Burtescu wrote:
> This is the libiberty (mainly for binutils/gdb) counterpart of
> https://github.com/alexcrichton/rustc-demangle/pull/23.
>
> Relevant
Ping: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-March/542012.html
Thanks,
- Eddy B.
On Fri, Mar 13, 2020, at 10:28 PM, Eduard-Mihai Burtescu wrote:
> This is the libiberty (mainly for binutils/gdb) counterpart of
> https://github.com/alexcrichton/rustc-demangle/pull/23.
>
> Relevant links
te: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 21:07:28 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Support the new ("v0") mangling scheme in rust-demangle.
This is the libiberty (mainly for binutils/gdb) counterpart of
https://github.com/alexcrichton/rustc-demangle/pull/23.
Relevant links for the new Rust mangling scheme (aka &quo
20 matches
Mail list logo
