From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Nov 14 09:55:08 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70777F38;
 Thu, 14 Nov 2013 09:55:08 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from theravensnest.org (theraven.freebsd.your.org [216.14.102.27])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D6882BC8;
 Thu, 14 Nov 2013 09:55:07 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [192.168.0.2] (cpc27-cmbg15-2-0-cust235.5-4.cable.virginm.net
 [86.27.188.236]) (authenticated bits=0)
 by theravensnest.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id rAE9suHS019937
 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
 Thu, 14 Nov 2013 09:54:59 GMT (envelope-from theraven@FreeBSD.org)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\))
Subject: Re: libc++ vs. libstdc++ usage in the ports tree
From: David Chisnall <theraven@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <352D9465-9840-43F0-A3A9-327DC12B0967@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 09:54:52 +0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <B2F7EDA4-DF34-4D5D-B995-5ADA1A9898D8@FreeBSD.org>
References: <20131112163219.GA2834@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
 <77CB2B92-216A-4C80-B033-7E582B5F0DFC@FreeBSD.org>
 <20131112165422.GA2939@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
 <E0FE40D9-726C-4501-B31A-3622510C1C68@FreeBSD.org>
 <20131112175556.GA3319@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
 <20131112201922.GA4330@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
 <20131113173143.Horde.a-9M7JQ_vHo3tpDIMsGK6g1@webmail.df.eu>
 <CAFMmRNxk25AJ3TMuceSG=EmL3qSE9Xhk_wpL5pAD8YvZrA6gkg@mail.gmail.com>
 <5283CA3C.3080201@FreeBSD.org>
 <352D9465-9840-43F0-A3A9-327DC12B0967@FreeBSD.org>
To: Dimitry Andric <dim@FreeBSD.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508)
Cc: FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org>,
 Ryan Stone <rysto32@gmail.com>, Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.16
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
 <freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-current>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 09:55:08 -0000

On 13 Nov 2013, at 19:40, Dimitry Andric <dim@freebsd.org> wrote:

> On the other hand, different C++ standard libraries simply cannot be
> mixed.  The internal implementations are usually completely different.
> This is not really news at all, certainly not to the ports people. :-)

That said, it should still be possible to mix them in different =
libraries.
The constraint from the wiki still applies: if you don't use STL types =
at library boundaries, then it should still work.  If you do, then the =
libc++ and libstdc++ symbols will be mangled differently and so you will =
get link-time errors.

In theory, if it links it should run...

David