Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 20:15:56 +0100 (BST) From: Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com> To: obrien@NUXI.com Cc: John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com>, sprice@hiwaay.net, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: (FWD) Re: Progs linked against libstdc++ dead... Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9904302012430.59263-100000@herring.nlsystems.com> In-Reply-To: <19990430114829.B95710@nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 30 Apr 1999, David O'Brien wrote: > > These are good questions, and I don't know enough yet about the issues > > surrounding vtable thunks to answer them. > > I haven't had time to really dig into this yet. Hopefully Saturday. I'm > about to revert the change until I can see what the problem is and what > the upgrade issues will be. EGCS 1.2 *should* be out in the July/Aug > time frame. Of course I will try to upgrade us to it (well 1.2.1 which I > figure will quickly follow). The EGCS maintainers are pushing to get > vtable thunks working properly for 1.2. > > Since the Linux config files specify DEFALUT_VTABLE_THUNKS=1, no one has > posted a bug report related to them, there is an option to turn them off, > and this *is* -CURRENT. I may just leave them turned on by default. > > Opinions? I would prefer to keep vtable thunks turned on. The alternative produces wretched code for multiple inheritance. Personally, I want -fnew-abi too; gcc does some disgusting things with multiple zero-sized base classes without it... -- Doug Rabson Mail: dfr@nlsystems.com Nonlinear Systems Ltd. Phone: +44 181 442 9037 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9904302012430.59263-100000>