This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: STL[quick questions]
- To: mrs at wrs dot com (Mike Stump)
- Subject: Re: STL[quick questions]
- From: Joe Buck <jbuck at Synopsys dot COM>
- Date: Mon, 7 Dec 98 14:35:37 PST
- Cc: jbuck at Synopsys dot COM, egcs at cygnus dot com
> > From: Joe Buck <jbuck@Synopsys.COM>
> > To: imarkov@math.ucla.edu (Igor Markov)
> > Date: Fri, 4 Dec 98 18:47:36 PST
>
> > The reason for not switching for 1.1 was bad timing, and 1.1.1 was
> > supposed to be binary compatible so we didn't switch.
>
> I suspect that we'll break binary compatibility with the newer STL.
> If we do, then turning on all the abi breaking stuff for 1.2 would be
> good, if the new code is ready in time.
We still don't have a C++ library that lives in std (the libstdc++ version
3 is not ready). However, it would be possible to turn on -fsquangle and
the new class layout (that uses 0 bytes for empty classes in almost all
cases).
> Or are people more interested in maintaining what binary compatibility
> we can between 1.1.1 and 1.2 (even if it isn' t complete
> compatibility)?
I don't know. In practice, the new STL won't break most binary interfaces
because relatively functions depend on STL, and even for those that do,
many of the STL classes have not changed layout.