This is the mail archive of the java@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the Java 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: CNI doc question

From: Tony Knaus <awk at spinnakernet dot com>
To: Bryce McKinlay <bryce at waitaki dot otago dot ac dot nz>
Cc: Jeff Sturm <jsturm at one-point dot com>, Nic Ferrier <nferrier at tapsellferrier dot co dot uk>, java at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 11:20:14 -0500
Subject: Re: CNI doc question
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10201272312180.11265-100000@mars.deadcafe.org> <3C55E806.7040908@waitaki.otago.ac.nz>

Bryce McKinlay wrote:
> 
> Jeff Sturm wrote:
> 
> >Wow, that's old.  G++ and gcj both use the new ABI on all targets since
> >the 3.0 release.  The -fvtable-thunks flag no longer has any effect,
> >though AFAIK -fno-rtti is still required for CNI sources.
> >
> 
> Hmm, I never use -fno-rtti and I havn't noticed any problems ;-)
> 

So is -fno-rtti required or not? I'm not using it and I haven't
noticed a problem either. Out of curiosity what is the conflict
between gcj and G++ rtti?

Thanks,

-tony

Follow-Ups:
- Re: CNI doc question
  - From: Bryce McKinlay

References:
- Re: CNI doc question
  - From: Jeff Sturm
- Re: CNI doc question
  - From: Bryce McKinlay

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