Am 27.05.22 um 20:31 schrieb Eric Gallager:
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 3:17 AM Simon Sobisch via Gcc-patches
wrote:
[...] the first question is: is it reasonable to add support for
GnuCOBOL?
* How would the demangler know it is to be called? Just "best match"
(GnuCOBOL modules always have some
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 3:17 AM Simon Sobisch via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Hi fellow hackers,
>
> first of all: I'm not sure if this is the correct mailing list for this
> question, but I did not found a separate one and
> gnu.org/software/libiberty redirects to
>
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 12:17 AM Simon Sobisch via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> As noted: the first question is: is it reasonable to add support for
> GnuCOBOL?
It seems fine to me to add support for demangling GnuCOBOL symbol
names controlled by a DMGL option (options are defined in
Hi fellow hackers,
first of all: I'm not sure if this is the correct mailing list for this
question, but I did not found a separate one and
gnu.org/software/libiberty redirects to
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libiberty.pdf - so I'm here.
If there's a better place for this: please drop a
