This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: ordering of constructors
Phil Edwards <phil@codesourcery.com> writes:
| > Libraries that the program manually loads and unloads are a whole
| > other mess.
|
| I will continue to pretend that those don't exist as long as each of the
| C++ and POSIX committees continue to pretend that the other doesn't exist...
The truth is more complicated than that. As chair of the Library
Working group, Matt knows better than I do about the kind of things
being considered for C++, but I would mention that there is a
subworking group trying to address the dynamic library problem, with
respect to C++. I don't think it is much a problem with POSIX and
C++ committees not having strong active communication channels than
a real mess in specifying what a program means in C++ when faced with
dynamic libraries and dynamic initializations. If standardization
means anything, we ought to look at existing practice and if
implementors are going to pretend that those don't exist, we've got an
egg-chicken problem. I suppose users just want their programs work
reasonably...
-- Gaby