This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [www-patch] bugs.html rewrite, part 6: section about upgradingthe compiler

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003, Volker Reichelt wrote:
> Well, the sentence would get way too long for my taste (about 4 lines in
> the HTML source). I'd rather suggest the following:
> + <h4>ABI changes</h4>
> + 
> + <p>The application binary interface (ABI) defines how the elements of
> + classes are laid out, how functions are called, how function names are
> + mangled etc.  It usually changes with each major release (i.e. when the
> + first or second part of the version number changes).  You <em>must</em>
> + recompile all C++ libraries, or you risk linker errors or crashing
> + programs.  However, the ABI is not changed with bug-fix releases (i.e.
> + when the third part of the version number changes).  The code should be
> + binary compatible among these versions.</p>

I like that one; it's much better than what I suggested. ;-)

> Btw, shouldn't we rather write "risk linker errors or
> malfunctioning/crashing programs" instead of just "... crashing
> programs"?

Yup. Perhaps just "malfunctioning"?

> I found another glitch in the patch: I forgot to update the heading for
> the new section in the table of contents. This will be fixed in the
> final version.

Fine, thanks!  (And please complain to the original reviewer for not
spotting that. <g>)


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]