This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: RFA: Please review the new C++ demangler patch
On Sat, Jun 28, 2003 at 12:50:05AM +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> Phil Edwards <phil@jaj.com> writes:
>
> | On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 11:36:35PM +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> | > | :-) Why fold
> | > | a completely unused library into the executable?
> | >
> | > static link against libstdc++-v3, does not mean the whole libstdc++-v3
> | > (especially the unused bits) is pulled into the executable. Does it?
> | > The contention seems to be the dependence on <string> and <vector>.
> |
> | Depends on how smart the linker is, and how fine-grained the library's
> | object files are.
> |
> | Anyhow, this is getting off-topic.
>
> We cannot get anywhere with handwaving.
What more would you like me to say? Static linking doesn't affect the
demangler issues, so I felt this discussion is getting off-topic.
As for your question about unused bits, well, I've done a fair bit
of research into the topic and would be happy to expound at length.
FAQ 2.5 briefly touches on the problems, namely: the linker isn't as
smart as we'd like it to be, and making the library's object files more
fine-grained brings a higher build time and a higher level of maintainence.
(The higher build times go away on systems which support PCH.) So, for now,
I only recommend statically linking as a last resort.
--
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater
than the animating contest for freedom, go home and leave us in peace. We seek
not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you;
and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. - Samuel Adams