On Sun, 2005-05-22 at 03:13 +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | On Sun, 2005-05-22 at 02:14 +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> | > Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | >
> | > | While moving FIELD_DECL to it's own substruct, the following questions
> | > | have come up. I figured one of you might know:
> | > |
> | > | 1. Do we need DECL_ASSEMBLER_NAME on FIELD_DECL? I can't think of a
> | > | place where we would actually try to *output* a FIELD_DECL directly, but
> | > | maybe i've missed something. I ask because the C frontend tests
> | > | decl_assembler_name on field decl, but never sets it on them.
> | >
> | >
> | > What happens when you have this (in C++)
> | >
> | > namespace foo {
> | > union {
> | > int baz;
> | > double foobar;
> | > } bar;
> | > };
> | >
> |
> | I tried this, and it still doesn't access DECL_ASSEMBLER_NAME of
> | FIELD_DECL.
>
> OK, that is the corner case that comes to my mind where C++ directly
> specifies linkage for FIELD_DECL. Maybe Jason or Mark might further
> comments.
I've actually discovered that we set the assembler name on a field that
is the vtable, but never actually use it again, at least for DWARF2 and
STABS (it's set to a constant called VFIELD_NAME).
I grepped .s file from all of libjava and the stl testcases compared
with -gstabs and -gdwarf-2, and none of them contain VFIELD_NAME with or
without my change.
>
> -- Gaby
