This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [www-patch] bugs.html rewrite,part 6: section about upgrading the compiler
- From: Volker Reichelt <reichelt at igpm dot rwth-aachen dot de>
- To: ro at TechFak dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE
- Cc: Richard dot Earnshaw at arm dot com, tm_gccmail at kloo dot net, gp at suse dot de,gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:44:07 +0100 (CET)
- Subject: Re: [www-patch] bugs.html rewrite,part 6: section about upgrading the compiler
- Reply-to: Volker Reichelt <reichelt at igpm dot rwth-aachen dot de>
On 20 Nov, Rainer Orth wrote:
> Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha@arm.com> writes:
>
>> The Java support libraries also contain C++ code. I think it's safer to
>> just say "recompile everything" here. True experts may be able to tell
>> when it's safe to ignore this suggestion, but others may need to err on
>> the side of caution in order to be sure.
> As an important aside, while the compilers' C++ ABI is formally specified
> (and adhered to except for bugs), the libstdc++-v3 ABI is not and still
> changes in incompatible ways between releases, AFAIK, so until this is
> resolved, recompilation will be necessary even with a stable C++ ABI.
Good point. So we actually have two ABI's, the C++ ABI and the
libstdc++-v3 ABI. We should clarify this is bugs.html (which currently
only talks about the C++ ABI).
Regards,
Volker