This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: egcs 1.2 C++ ABI (Re: C++: STL 3.2)
>>>>> "Martin" == Martin v Loewis <martin@mira.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de> writes:
Martin> a) Leave everything as-is, claiming no compatibility. b)
Martin> Leave everything as-is, claiming limited compatibility
Martin> (like: no use of STL, always link with 1.2). If such claim
Martin> is made, it should be valid. c) Claim stronger
Martin> compatibility, and make changes to support that stronger
Martin> compat. d) Claim no compatibility, and activate some
Martin> new-abi stuff. Squangling and the empty bases come to
Martin> mind, honor-std should wait for the new libstdc++.
Martin> If people are in favour of a), I'd like to know what's
Martin> wrong with d).
I think I'm in favor of a). Your argument for d), given that, is
cute, but a little simplistic. In particular, the changes you're
proposing just aren't heavily tested and we're at feature-freeze time.
I do think squanling works (I use it on a MIPS machine all the time),
but it just hasn't received the kind of abuse that our default options
have.
Your argument is, perhaps, a better argument for turning on -fnew-abi
by default *after we branch*, IMO.
--
Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com