This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: HPUX C++ ABI
- From: Mike Stump <mrs at apple dot com>
- To: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, jessica at cup dot hp dot com, sje at cup dot hp dot com
- Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 15:08:45 -0700
- Subject: Re: HPUX C++ ABI
On Thursday, September 12, 2002, at 10:46 AM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
There is a slippery slope argument that "everyone else will want us to
support there variant of the ABI too". But, there is no everyone else;
HP is the only vendor with an installed base that does not feel they
can make changes to their ABI.
I don't think I buy this. For example, tell us how Apple is
uninterested in preserving the abi compatibility of C++ objects for
kernel loadable extensions. Can we add changes to gcc to make it
compatible with something that is close?
Now, compare the installed base of IA-64 HP systems to Apple systems,
let me know what you find. I don't claim to know the numbers, but I am
curious as to what they are.
What do others think?
Sounds like the same problem g++ will face, rev the abi to make g++ be
compatible with the standard, or don't rev it because people want abi
stability. If you rev it, you loose, if you don't rev it, you loose.
I'm not surprised that we are loosing now. The game was rigged to be
that way. It is inescapable with current technology.
Now, having said all of that I guess my position is that I don't mind
if it goes in, as gcc is all about being flexible and accommodating
random abi conventions of all sorts.