From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26758 invoked by alias); 29 Nov 2012 18:34:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 25633 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Nov 2012 18:34:39 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from plane.gmane.org (HELO plane.gmane.org) (80.91.229.3) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 18:34:38 +0000 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Te8wh-0001QV-N8 for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 19:34:47 +0100 Received: from 209-6-90-240.c3-0.smr-ubr1.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com ([209.6.90.240]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 19:34:47 +0100 Received: from jason by 209-6-90-240.c3-0.smr-ubr1.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 19:34:47 +0100 To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org From: Jason Merrill Subject: Re: [PATCH] Vtable pointer verification, gcc changes (patch 2 of 2) Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 18:35:00 -0000 Message-ID: <50B7AAB3.8080903@redhat.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Xinliang David Li , GCC Patches User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121029 Thunderbird/16.0.2 In-Reply-To: X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2012-11/txt/msg02485.txt.bz2 Message-ID: <20121129183500.Ki4k3YbgKIKtAaC1qEYTgys5VQ6YqJEDRKfQXU4AYzY@z> On 11/16/2012 01:21 PM, Caroline Tice wrote: > -start_objects (int method_type, int initp) > +start_objects (int method_type, int initp, const char *extra_name) I don't think we want to mess with start_objects and such here. Can't you just use DECL_STATIC_CONSTRUCTOR (decl) = 1; SET_DECL_INIT_PRIORITY (decl, priority); on your initialization function instead? Jason