This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Switching the default for -fabi-version
- From: law at redhat dot com
- To: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: Richard Guenther <rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen dot de>, Joe Buck <jbuck at synopsys dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 08:49:52 -0600
- Subject: Re: Switching the default for -fabi-version
- Reply-to: law at redhat dot com
In message <email@example.com>, Mark Mitchell writ
>> which are not very clear (may vs. will) and omitting of a reason (in case
>> of the second warning). So to say, if I can still specify -fabi-version=0
>> I'm happy with changing. But you could try to make sure you dont break
>> libstdc++ compatibility with this change?
>This is the point everyone seems to be missing: libstdc++ compatibility
>is *already* going to break in GCC 3.4.
But as you know, not everyone uses libstdc++ ;-)
>And, what, really is the benefit of keeping the default compiler ABI
>consistent with a previous version if the runtime library is going to
>bump its major version number?
The ability to build plug-ins for popular packages such as Mozilla.
The ability to interoperate with existing C++ runtimes that may not be
>The only situation where the change I'm proposing would matter is when
>you're using the new compiler with the old library. That probably won't
>work anyhow -- since, for example, the new parser probably can't handle
>the old headers.
I wasn't aware of this.
>But, if, somehow, it would work without the change, it will also work
>with the change -- provided you add -fabi-version=1 to your command
That may ultimately be the answer. Bump up and allow folks who need it
to explicitly ask for the old ABI.