You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I might argue that this should be part of Milestone 4, Well-Covered, before production-ready; Tools (both internal and third-party) to evaluate code quality and code correctness are going to need this.
Nominating for removal from a milestone. This is pretty backwards compatible, I think it's safe to have the exact definition of our symbols in flux at 1.0.
I'm not sure what the complete extent of the scope of this issue was intended to be, but our mangled symbols are indeed reversible (see @alexcrichton 's repo at https://github.com/alexcrichton/rustc-demangle/blob/master/src/lib.rs ). I highly suspect that the exact symbol mangling scheme isn't considered stable though, but I'd consider that to be a distinct issue that we'd need to tackle if we ever wanted to stabilize our ABI.
Activity
thestinger commentedon Jul 6, 2013
Nominating for the production ready milestone. Debugging and profiling really need to be sane, and these are going to be visible in any traceback.
brson commentedon Jul 8, 2013
Please do not assign issues to milestones. The nomination process is documented here: https://github.com/mozilla/rust/wiki/Note-milestone-nomination
thestinger commentedon Jul 8, 2013
@brson: Ah, I had the wrong impression about how the process worked.
pnkfelix commentedon Sep 4, 2013
Visiting for triage, email from 2013-09-02.
I might argue that this should be part of Milestone 4, Well-Covered, before production-ready; Tools (both internal and third-party) to evaluate code quality and code correctness are going to need this.
alexcrichton commentedon Sep 5, 2013
Improvement will be made in #8875, although it's mostly fixing bugs there in name collisions, and I think that there's still room for improvement.
catamorphism commentedon Sep 12, 2013
Accepted for production-ready
pnkfelix commentedon Mar 20, 2014
Assiging to 1.0 milestone, since it would be good to have this and it sounds like we might almost already have it. But also giving it priority P-low.
alexcrichton commentedon May 5, 2014
Nominating for removal from a milestone. This is pretty backwards compatible, I think it's safe to have the exact definition of our symbols in flux at 1.0.
brson commentedon May 8, 2014
P-low, not 1.0.
alexcrichton commentedon May 31, 2014
http://mentorembedded.github.io/cxx-abi/abi.html#mangle.template-param appears to be a good summary of C++ name mangling and how we may be able to leverage the support from C++ for things like generics.
steveklabnik commentedon Apr 28, 2015
Triage: no changes here.
steveklabnik commentedon Jun 6, 2016
Triage: no change
bstrie commentedon Mar 22, 2017
I'm not sure what the complete extent of the scope of this issue was intended to be, but our mangled symbols are indeed reversible (see @alexcrichton 's repo at https://github.com/alexcrichton/rustc-demangle/blob/master/src/lib.rs ). I highly suspect that the exact symbol mangling scheme isn't considered stable though, but I'd consider that to be a distinct issue that we'd need to tackle if we ever wanted to stabilize our ABI.
Auto merge of rust-lang#7610 - Labelray:master, r=camsteffen
Merge rust-lang#7610