From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-56144-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 32435 invoked by alias); 5 Jul 2002 20:16:20 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 32424 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2002 20:16:18 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO gandalf.codesourcery.com) (66.60.148.227)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 Jul 2002 20:16:18 -0000
Received: from gandalf.codesourcery.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by gandalf.codesourcery.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g65KBAN04380;
	Fri, 5 Jul 2002 13:11:10 -0700
Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2002 14:28:00 -0000
From: Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
To: Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.de>
cc: "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: C++ binary compatibility between GCC 3.1 and GCC 3.2?
Message-ID: <19510000.1025899870@gandalf.codesourcery.com>
In-Reply-To: <u88z4qvsts.fsf@gromit.moeb>
References: <u8k7ob78p1.fsf@gromit.moeb>
 <18910000.1025898677@gandalf.codesourcery.com> <u88z4qvsts.fsf@gromit.moeb>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg00233.txt.bz2


>> In any case, GCC 3.1 and GCC 3.2 will not be 100% binary compatible
>> with respect to the C++ ABI.
>
> How severe is this?  Will people encounter this in every day code or
> is only in some esoteric situations?

Questions like this are always difficult to answer.

I would lean towards "only in some esoteric situations", but of course
that depends on exactly what you consider esoteric.

>> I can't say what that might mean as a distributor.
>
> Putting on my distributor hat - and answering without much thinking
> about all the implications - it would be better to have 3.1.1 and 3.2
> compatible (with the cost of 3.1 and 3.1.1 not compatible to each
> other).

This bit has already been decided.  We will not break compatibility
between minor releases (3.1 and 3.1.1) unless it is absolutely
necessary.  I don't think renumbering is going to help a lot.

--
Mark Mitchell                   mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC               http://www.codesourcery.com