This is the mail archive of the 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: Switching the default for -fabi-version

In message <>, Mark Mitch
ell writes:
 >On Tue, 2003-10-21 at 16:44, Mike Stump wrote:
 >> On Tuesday, October 21, 2003, at 04:24 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
 >> > Since nobody really objected to David Moore's suggestion that we make
 >> > -fabi-version=2 the default, I plan to change the default value of the
 >> > flag on the mainline in the next few days.
 >> >
 >> > If you object, speak up now!
 >> Wait a few days or so, then consider putting this on the announce list. 
 >>   That way we pick up folks that would not otherwise read the minutia of 
 >> day-to-day gcc development.  Plug in architectures, openoffice, GTK, Qt 
 >> come to mind...
 >> I don't expect anyone to object...  but I think it is good to 
 >> communicate with users on important points like this.
 >Actually, I think that's not an appropriate use of the announce list.
 >The average announce reader wants to know when a new release is out so
 >they go download it.
 >Understanding what this change even means requires an in-depth knowledge
 >of compilers and C++.
 >"Hi.  We're planning to change the default C++ ABI in the next version
 >of G++.  You won't notice because (a) you'll have to recompile
 >everything anyhow to use the library that comes with the new G++, and
 >(b) this only affects weird corner-cases.  However, if you happen to
 >have no weird corner-cases and are going to try to use the new compiler
 >with the old library, you might care.
 >So, do you object?"
 >I think that, given that the only people likely to notice are people who
 >are operating way outside the mainstream of C++ development, this is not
 >a decision that needs to be pre-announced.  It should of course go in
 >the release notes.
Well, maybe someone with in depth knowledge of what ABI things
have changed should chime in at this point and indicate what
has actually changed :-)

That seems like critical information to be able to make an informed


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