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: Proposed change: weak symbol support for Darwin


On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 10:43:04AM -0700, Matt Austern wrote:
> I agree that we have to conform to what the ABI says.  So this may just
> be a digression, but...  Do you happen to remember why the ABI says
> that, and can you think of any way for a program to tell the difference
> between emitting a symbol in a single translation unit with vague
> linkage and emitting it with ordinary linkage?

It would appear that the ABI-writers had two choices: they either would
have so specify that all compilers must use the "cfront trick" for
generating only one vtable, with a thorough description of the details of
how to do this, or they could simplify the job and just specify vague
linkage.  Otherwise they would not achieve the goal of interoperability
for object code compiled by different compilers.


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