This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Mistake in C++ ABI substitution rules?
- From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Joe Buck <jbuck at synopsys dot COM>
- Cc: Stan Shebs <shebs at apple dot com>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "cxx-abi-dev at codesourcery dot com" <cxx-abi-dev at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 10:14:00 -0800
- Subject: Re: Mistake in C++ ABI substitution rules?
- References: <200202201757.JAA23109@atrus.synopsys.com>
> If all the folks who implemented the ABI interpreted it that way, we
> have no problem with s/may/must/. But if some did not, then we don't
> have a portable ABI, someone will have to make changes.
I strongly believe that all vendors have implemented the substitution
semantics. I know that Intel, GCC, and HP have all implemented these
Like many things about the ABI, the name-mangling rules are not nearly
as clear as I would like. Whenever I say something like this, Jason
reminds me that I could fix the spec, and then I find myself
Unfortunately, the little unclarities mean that corner cases do come
up where things are not compatible.
Mark Mitchell firstname.lastname@example.org
CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com