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: Anonymous Namespaces


"Zack Weinberg" <zack@codesourcery.com> writes:

| Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@integrable-solutions.net> writes:
| 
| > Kevin Atkinson <kevina@gnu.org> writes:
| >
| > | Is there a reason gcc 3.4 does not treat functions inside an anonymous
| > | namespace as having static linkage.
| >
| > Because the C++ standard says those thingies have external linkage.
| 
| This doesn't preclude our doing optimizations on the information that
| thingies inside an anonymous namespace can only be accessed from the
| current translation unit.

There is no dispute there!  

| Further, if a conforming program can't tell the difference, I don't
| see why we couldn't tag those symbols local in the object file.

Just lay down the conditions under which a conforming program can tell
the difference (and implement :-).  

| This would, at least, avoid the need for the random-bytes mess.

I don't know.

-- Gaby


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