This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org 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: Duplicate data objects in shared libraries



From: "Jason Merrill" <jason@redhat.com>
To: "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org>

> > both A.so and B.so should resolve to C.so, I think it makes sense.
>
> Yes, that is what I was saying.  A possible refinement would be
>
> 6) #5, but if the definition in the RTLD_LOCAL object is strong, use it
in
>    the object.
>
> Which would produce the current Linux semantics described above if the
> definitions in A.so and B.so are strong, and the current Solaris
semantics
> described above if they are weak.  This would allow a plugin writer to
> override operator new for their plugin without affecting uses in
> libstdc++.  Obviously, the plugin writer would need to be careful to
> handle all of their own memory allocation/deallocation.

That's a common model for plugins; it would be very useful if we could
support it.


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