This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: C++ ABI Issues
Jan Hubicka <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
| On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 11:32:12AM -0700, Joe Buck wrote:
| > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2002 at 05:10:19PM -0700, Joe Buck wrote:
| > > > > 2. Tail-padding and virtual base classes
| > > [...]
| > > > Question: does anyone know if case 2 affects anything in libstdc++?
| > > > (e.g. iostream classes?)
| > >
| > > No, I don't think anyone knows yet. As soon as warnings are added to
| > > detect this kind of thing, I'll find out. :-)
| > It seems that even if it does, we can preserve libstdc++'s binary
| > compatibility by adding a dummy field that exactly fills up any padding.
| > This will make no difference in 3.2, and will force any compiler correctly
| > implementing the ABI to match the 3.2 interface.
| Sorr for jumping into discussion, but :0
| What exactly will this bring us? libstdc++ is not only C++ library installed
| in the system and it is one of the most easilly upgardable when reinstalling
Yes. Furthermore, libstdc++ has an ABI versioning both in the source
code and in the built binary. I much prefer we use those menchanisms.