This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: HPUX C++ ABI
- From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
- To: nathan at cs dot bris dot ac dot uk
- Cc: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>, Kumar Gala <kumar dot gala at motorola dot com>, Stan Shebs <shebs at apple dot com>, Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, gcc <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: 13 Sep 2002 12:40:57 +0200
- Subject: Re: HPUX C++ ABI
- Organization: Integrable Solutions
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0209130025330.15764-100000@dberlin.org> <3D81B5A3.83C4E4A5@acm.org>
Nathan Sidwell <nathan@acm.org> writes:
| Daniel Berlin wrote:
| > > Wear does the line get drawn ?
| >
| > At bug compatibility. These are *bugs* in aCC.
| (unless I misunderstand) HP have declared them features.
Ahem, obviously, that depends on appropriate definitions of "bug" and
"feature". Personally, I think they are bugs in aCC, but I understand
HP quelifying them as features. Oh, well.
I'm not convinced that we should fix aCC bugs in GCC. The right place
to do it is in aCC, IMHO.
I'm getting the impression that when it comes to put things like
extensions or bug-compatibility patches in GCC, some vendors are more
favored than others. That doesn't look fair to me. I would love to
be prove wrong but, currently, that is the impression I have :-(
-- Gaby