[cfe-dev] Where do we really need mangled names

[David Blaikie]

On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 10:34 AM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com>wrote:

> > Is it just that it's a performance optimization compared to having to
> walk
> > the DIE parent chain to build a fully qualified name? If that's the case,
> > can we quantify that perf/size tradeoff? (though at that point it's a
> fair
> > question about why have the mangled name at all - I'm not really sure
> what
> > GDB uses it for when it is present (on externally visible functions))
> >
>
> As a side note here it's pretty hard to do this. At least, afaik, no
> debugger actually has a performance suite and few people seem
> interested in writing one sadly.


Yeah, I realize that's a bit presumptuous/idealistic on my part. Seems hard
to reason about/justify tradeoffs like this without some kind of analysis.

I guess accelerator tables (just the biggest/most obvious debug info
size/debugger speed tradeoff that springs to mind) were just such such a
substantial win to speed and sufficiently small size that they were
'obvious' without very fine-grained experimentation?

- David
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20140217/794e6fa0/attachment.html>