2003-02-24 David Carlton <carlton@math.stanford.edu>

	* symtab.c (lookup_partial_symbol): Use strcmp_iw_ordered to
	do the comparison, not strcmp.
	* symfile.c (compare_psymbols): Ditto.
	* defs.h: Declare strcmp_iw_ordered.
	* utils.c (strcmp_iw_ordered): New function.

1 files changed, 80 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/gdb/utils.c b/gdb/utils.c
index 0d9fb31..df196ec 100644
--- a/gdb/utils.c
+++ b/gdb/utils.c
@@ -2358,6 +2358,86 @@ strcmp_iw (const char *string1, const char *string2)
   return (*string1 != '\0' && *string1 != '(') || (*string2 != '\0');
 }
 
+/* This is like strcmp except that it ignores whitespace and treats
+   '(' as the first non-NULL character in terms of ordering.  Like
+   strcmp (and unlike strcmp_iw), it returns negative if STRING1 <
+   STRING2, 0 if STRING2 = STRING2, and positive if STRING1 > STRING2
+   according to that ordering.
+
+   If a list is sorted according to this function and if you want to
+   find names in the list that match some fixed NAME according to
+   strcmp_iw(LIST_ELT, NAME), then the place to start looking is right
+   where this function would put NAME.
+
+   Here are some examples of why using strcmp to sort is a bad idea:
+
+   Whitespace example:
+
+   Say your partial symtab contains: "foo<char *>", "goo".  Then, if
+   we try to do a search for "foo<char*>", strcmp will locate this
+   after "foo<char *>" and before "goo".  Then lookup_partial_symbol
+   will start looking at strings beginning with "goo", and will never
+   see the correct match of "foo<char *>".
+
+   Parenthesis example:
+
+   In practice, this is less like to be an issue, but I'll give it a
+   shot.  Let's assume that '$' is a legitimate character to occur in
+   symbols.  (Which may well even be the case on some systems.)  Then
+   say that the partial symbol table contains "foo$" and "foo(int)".
+   strcmp will put them in this order, since '$' < '('.  Now, if the
+   user searches for "foo", then strcmp will sort "foo" before "foo$".
+   Then lookup_partial_symbol will notice that strcmp_iw("foo$",
+   "foo") is false, so it won't proceed to the actual match of
+   "foo(int)" with "foo".  */
+
+int
+strcmp_iw_ordered (const char *string1, const char *string2)
+{
+  while ((*string1 != '\0') && (*string2 != '\0'))
+    {
+      while (isspace (*string1))
+	{
+	  string1++;
+	}
+      while (isspace (*string2))
+	{
+	  string2++;
+	}
+      if (*string1 != *string2)
+	{
+	  break;
+	}
+      if (*string1 != '\0')
+	{
+	  string1++;
+	  string2++;
+	}
+    }
+
+  switch (*string1)
+    {
+      /* Characters are non-equal unless they're both '\0'; we want to
+	 make sure we get the comparison right according to our
+	 comparison in the cases where one of them is '\0' or '('.  */
+    case '\0':
+      if (*string2 == '\0')
+	return 0;
+      else
+	return -1;
+    case '(':
+      if (*string2 == '\0')
+	return 1;
+      else
+	return -1;
+    default:
+      if (*string2 == '(')
+	return 1;
+      else
+	return *string1 - *string2;
+    }
+}
+
 /* A simple comparison function with opposite semantics to strcmp.  */
 
 int