Hello, On 2009 m. June 26 d., Friday 19:43:13 Ben Hutchings wrote: > > Would it be possible to implement expansion to a regexp instead of to a > string that must exactly match?
I think yes if there is no other way (and according to your answers, there
really isn't). Symbol files have two usage scenarios in my mind:
1) Smart symbol based shlibs management (primary goal).
2) Tracking ABI breakages (side effect).
However, the second has never been entirely true neither for C (e.g. function
parameter / return type changes cannot be detected) nor C++ (e.g. class size
changes are not detected while function parameter changes are (sort of)).
Adding regexps would make ABI tracking even more relaxed.
While apparently, VT can't be implemented differently (except \d+), what about
size_t etc. then? They all can be implemented as regexps too the most simple
being 'any character'. However, in my opinion, exact string matching is
worthwhile to keep whenever possible.
Also, this rises another question if dpkg-gensymbols should handle VT symbols
automagically since they (typically) can be autodetected (unless they are
compressed):
^_ZThn?\d+
^_ZTvn?\d+_n?\d+
^_ZTC - AKA construction vtable, but it is rather complex to detect where the
offset is in this one, e.g.: _ZTCN6KParts15DockMainWindow3E56_NS_8PartBaseE
^^
Raphael, should I provide a patch for regexp support + {vt} subst as implicit
\d+ regexp?
--
Modestas Vainius <modes...@vainius.eu>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
