C++ ABI issues

[Jason Merrill]

>>>>> "Benjamin" == Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz@redhat.com> writes:

> Do you know of other ABI-changing bits? I don't think I got them all.

We've tried to document them in gcc/cp/NEWS, but I forgot to mention the
mangling change.  Will fix.

The 128-bit ints patch wasn't an ABI change; previously we crashed on
affected code, now we do the right thing.

>> > Why just non-ia64 targets?
>> 
>> Because for ia64, the ABI is a cross-vendor standard.  If we bumped the
>> version, we would be incompatible with all other compilers, which would
>> subvert the entire point of the ABI.

> So, how are differences between the C++ ABI in 3.0.x and 3.1.x deduced?

What do you mean?  3.1 is more compliant with the ABI standard than 3.0
was.  The ABI changes are all bugfixes to make us more compliant.

Jason