This is the mail archive of the
cygwin@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: objdump : inaccurate demangling for foo(char* const)
- From: "Alex Vinokur" <alexvn at connect dot to>
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 07:31:12 +0300
- Subject: Re: objdump : inaccurate demangling for foo(char* const)
- References: <bkdtn1$597$2@sea.gmane.org>
"Alex Vinokur" <alexvn@connect.to> wrote in message bkdtn1$597$2@sea.gmane.org">news:bkdtn1$597$2@sea.gmane.org...
> ==========================================
> Windows 2000 Professional
> CYGWIN_NT-5.0 1.5.4(0.94/3/2)
> GNU gcc version 3.2 20020927 (prerelease)
> GNU objdump 2.14.90 20030901
> ==========================================
>
Updated question about objdump.
Low-level and user-level symbol names of foo2(char* const) are foo2(char*)
--------- C++ code ---------
void foo1 (char*) {}
void foo2 (char* const) {}
----------------------------
--------- objdump : Fragments ---------
$ objdump -Cd t.o
t.o: file format pe-i386
Disassembly of section .text:
00000000 <__Z4foo1Pc>: // OK
00000006 <__Z4foo2Pc>: // char*, not char* const
$ objdump -d t.o
t.o: file format pe-i386
Disassembly of section .text:
00000000 <foo1(char*)>: // OK
00000006 <foo2(char*)>: // Not char* const
--------------------------------------
So, is it inaccuracy or convention?
=====================================
Alex Vinokur
mailto:alexvn@connect.to
http://mathforum.org/library/view/10978.html
=====================================
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/