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

[Ian Lance Taylor]

Joern Rennecke <amylaar@spamcop.net> writes:

> 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?

I was imagining that if gcc is built with C++, then plugins would be
built with C++.

Ian