[cxx-abi-dev] C++0x: mangling of char16_t and char32_t

[Michael Wong]

I would prefer if we hold off using q for now, as it is in a contentious
mode for one of the DFP manglings which I still have to discuss with other
C++ ABI members for an alternative:
Currently IBM and I think GNU (but in 4.3) uses these for name mangling of
DFP builtin types:
>>     Decimal32:          "p"
>>     Decimal64:          "q"
>>     Decimal128:         "r"
One of the issue is the same which is a wish for a more descriptive
mangling. Others include whether we really care about interoperability
given the different underlying representations, emulation modes vs hardware
modes issues.

So in summary, I would appreciate it if you would avoid this area until we
can settle this issue.

Michael Wong
XL C++ Compiler kernel Development
IBM Canada Ltd., C2/KD2/8200/MKM
8200 Warden Avenue
Markham, Ontario  L6G 1C7
W:905-413-3283 F:905-413-4839
Boost test results
http://www-1.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?rs=2239&context=SSJT9L&uid=swg27006911

C/C++ Compilers Support Page
http://www.ibm.com/software/awdtools/ccompilers/support/
C/C++ Feature Request Interface
http://www.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg27005811
XL Fortran Compiler Support Page
http://www.ibm.com/software/awdtools/fortran/xlfortran/support/
XL Fortran Feature Request Interface
http://www.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg27005812


                                                                           
             David Vandevoorde                                             
             <daveed at edg.com>                                              
                                                                        To 
             03/25/2008 12:08          Doug Gregor                         
             PM                        <doug.gregor at gmail.com>,            
                                       cxx-abi-dev at codesourcery.com        
                                                                        cc 
                                                                           
                                                                   Subject 
                                       Re: [cxx-abi-dev] C++0x: mangling   
                                       of char16_t and char32_t            
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           





On Mar 25, 2008, at 11:25 AM, Doug Gregor wrote:
> We don't have a mangling for the C++0x char16_t or char32_t types. It
> has been suggested that we use 'k' for char16_t and 'q' for char32_t.
> Does that seem reasonable?


Fine by me, although I'd prefer something a little more "mnemonical";
maybe W2 and W4.

             Daveed