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]

--enable-build-with-cxx vs plugins (Was: Re: Extra regressions for --enable-build-with-cxx)


Quoting Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com>:

I'm not surprised that plugins don't work

For Milepost we need both the --enable-build-with-cxx configure option and plugins. How is this supposed to work? Should the person compiling the plugins use C++ to compile the plugin? Or should the cc1 / cc1plus dso export unambiguous symbols with C linkage names in addition to the C++ linkage names? Or should we have a language extension to specify C++ linkage in C headers, and arrange for the gcc headers that are installed for teh benefit of plugins to reflect the used build/bootstrap language so that either gcc or g++ will just work, using references with the appropriate names?


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