This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
- To: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Subject: Re: PR3042
- From: David Edelsohn <dje at watson dot ibm dot com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 12:33:29 -0400
- cc: Phil Edwards <pedwards at disaster dot jaj dot com>, Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz at redhat dot com>, "Gabriel dot Dos-Reis at cmla dot ens-cachan dot fr" <Gabriel dot Dos-Reis at cmla dot ens-cachan dot fr>, "jason at cygnus dot com" <jason at cygnus dot com>, "libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org" <libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org>
I do not think that it is appropriate to make this sort of change
in the behavior of G++ so late in the release cycle. Despite how much
people believe they understand the implications of this, it is dangerous
and not good release engineering practice.
What C++ statement would allocate the storage for a static class
member with your proposed change in linkage behavior?