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: Results from Intel4s C++ ABI Testsuite


> On Sat, Jul 20, 2002 at 10:05:01AM +0100, Nick Ing-Simmons wrote:
> > It seems to me (as a casual reader who does not use C++ much),
> > that the fact that "type safe linkage" is encoding the "name" of the 
> > type rather than the "type" is sub-optimal. If what was encoded
> > was "unsigned integer of 32-bits" then the two size_t-s would match.
> 
> Unfurtunately, C++ allows a function to be overloaded based on
> the type, and thus the mangling scheme must allow both f(int)
> and f(long) to exist.  Which would not be possible if the mangling
> were done based on width.

The problem could have been avoided by going in the other direction and
making size_t a true type rather than a typedef in C++, and in fact, C++
did this with wchar_t.



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