This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Linkonce vs comdat

From: James Lemke <jim at wasabisystems dot com>
To: Ian Lance Taylor <ian at wasabisystems dot com>
Cc: Matt Austern <austern at apple dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: 23 Sep 2003 10:34:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Linkonce vs comdat
Organization:
References: <9E184F12-ED48-11D7-87E4-000393B2ABA2@apple.com> <m3brtcza5e.fsf@gossamer.airs.com>

> It is not the same.  As the codesourcery page implies without really
> stating explicitly, there are several different implementations which
> could all be called COMDAT.  I believe the name `COMDAT' was
> introduced by the Microsoft PE format.

As I recall there was a record by that name in Microsoft and IBM's OMF
(object module format) that was used for DOS, early Windows and OS/2. 
Even earlier than PE!

I think it was a contraction for COMMON DATA, but my memory is fading
:-)>

-- 
James Lemke   jim@wasabisystems.com   Barrie, Ontario
http://www.wasabisystems.com

References:
- Linkonce vs comdat
  - From: Matt Austern
- Re: Linkonce vs comdat
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]