This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: fix for PR 4447: is this really correct?
- From: Joe Buck <jbuck at synopsys dot COM>
- To: mrs at windriver dot com (mike stump)
- Cc: jbuck at synopsys dot COM, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org,lerdsuwa at users dot sourceforge dot net
- Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 16:14:30 -0800 (PST)
- Subject: Re: fix for PR 4447: is this really correct?
I wrote:
> > I'd prefer to have neither the ICE nor the ABI breakage, but I'd
> > prefer the latter to the former.
However, it turns out that the strange mangling is exactly what the ABI
specifies, according to Kriang, so the issue is moot.
> > News flash: 3.1 will have a couple of minor ABI bug fixes
>
> :-( Such is life.
>
> > so it seems that we're already in a position to break the ABI,
>
> We don't just doom 3.1 to breaking, but some random future version of
> the compiler, with luck, it will just be 3.1.
We are converging to a written spec, which is supposed to be supported
by multiple compilers. If we leave the 3.0 deviations from this spec,
we don't keep our word about implementing the spec. We had an argument
about whether we should have fixed the first error discovered in 3.0.1,
and we decided to wait until 3.1. Just as well, since one more was
found. In practice, the main 3.0 -> 3.1 incompatibility will be
in the standard library.