From: David Edelsohn <dje@watson.ibm.com>
To: Joe Buck <Joe.Buck@synopsys.com>
Cc: mark@codesourcery.com (Mark Mitchell), gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: C++ ABI Issues
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 18:32:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200208270132.VAA29998@makai.watson.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200208270010.RAA17413@atrus.synopsys.com>
>>>>> Joe Buck writes:
Joe> Finally, there's the issue of how far we bend over to make it easier to
Joe> accomodate the proprietary competition to GCC on GNU/Linux. That is, who
Joe> are we doing this ABI for? Describing GCC so precisely so that it can be
Joe> easily replaced? Mind you, I *do* want good documentation and adherence
Joe> to standards, and I'm against the introduction of any artificial barriers,
Joe> but the distributors really, really wanted a release that would re-unify
Joe> the world and we gave it to them. Maybe the best thing in the short term
Joe> is for the competition to release patches to make their compilers
Joe> bug-compatible with GCC.
I think it is highly arrogant if GCC says that the ABI is whatever
we implemented. There is an external ABI specification. G++ claims that
it follows the spec. Other proprietary compilers implementing the ABI
were able to get these cases correct without an external conformance
testsuite. Acting as if the entire world revolves around GCC will not
elicit much respect for GNU/Linux and GCC from the marketplace.
David
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-08-26 18:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 73+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-08-26 15:18 Mark Mitchell
2002-08-26 16:18 ` Mike Stump
2002-08-26 16:43 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-08-26 21:58 ` Geoff Keating
2002-08-26 16:46 ` Loren James Rittle
2002-08-26 17:10 ` Joe Buck
2002-08-26 18:32 ` David Edelsohn [this message]
2002-08-26 18:35 ` David S. Miller
2002-08-26 19:25 ` David Edelsohn
2002-08-26 20:40 ` Per Bothner
2002-08-27 10:08 ` Joe Buck
2002-08-27 11:51 ` Jeff Law
2002-08-28 4:32 ` Richard Earnshaw
2002-08-26 18:47 ` Joe Buck
2002-08-26 23:27 ` Jakub Jelinek
2002-08-26 23:57 ` Mark Mitchell
2002-08-27 7:40 ` Jeff Law
2002-08-27 11:28 ` Phil Edwards
2002-08-27 11:32 ` Joe Buck
2002-08-27 11:43 ` Jan Hubicka
2002-08-27 12:00 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-08-27 15:10 ` Joe Buck
2002-08-27 15:18 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-08-27 12:09 ` Joe Buck
2002-08-27 12:34 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-08-27 11:58 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-08-27 14:50 ` Joe Buck
2002-08-27 15:06 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-08-27 15:21 ` Joe Buck
2002-08-27 15:32 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-08-27 15:46 ` Joe Buck
2002-08-27 22:28 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-08-28 10:04 ` Joe Buck
2002-08-26 19:18 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-08-26 23:44 ` Mark Mitchell
2002-08-27 5:33 ` Nathan Sidwell
2002-08-27 5:58 ` Allan Sandfeld Jensen
2002-08-27 7:32 ` Nathan Sidwell
2002-09-07 13:32 ` David O'Brien
2002-09-22 2:49 ` David O'Brien
2002-09-22 11:15 ` Mark Mitchell
2002-09-23 10:01 ` Joe Buck
2002-09-23 13:04 ` David O'Brien
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-08-27 10:26 Benjamin Kosnik
2002-08-27 11:06 ` Ziemowit Laski
2002-08-27 11:15 ` Mike Stump
2002-08-27 11:27 ` Ziemowit Laski
2002-08-27 11:56 ` Mike Stump
2002-08-27 15:19 ` Toon Moene
2002-09-07 13:33 ` David O'Brien
2002-08-27 14:37 ` Joe Buck
2002-08-28 4:41 ` Richard Earnshaw
2002-08-26 20:40 Benjamin Kosnik
2002-08-26 23:55 ` Mark Mitchell
2002-08-27 6:03 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-08-27 6:40 ` Andreas Jaeger
2002-08-27 7:27 ` Jeff Law
2002-08-27 7:49 ` Jeff Law
2002-08-27 7:30 ` Jeff Law
2002-08-27 8:45 ` Mark Mitchell
2002-08-27 9:33 ` Janis Johnson
2002-08-27 14:55 ` Mark Mitchell
2002-08-27 9:50 ` Mark Mitchell
2002-08-27 10:50 ` Devang Patel
2002-08-27 12:02 ` Per Bothner
2002-08-27 10:37 ` Mike Stump
2002-03-18 13:44 C++ ABI issues mike stump
2002-03-18 10:30 Benjamin Kosnik
2002-03-18 13:05 ` Jason Merrill
2002-03-18 13:46 ` Mark Mitchell
2002-03-18 14:13 ` Benjamin Kosnik
2002-03-18 15:19 ` Jason Merrill
2002-03-17 16:33 Jason Merrill
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200208270132.VAA29998@makai.watson.ibm.com \
--to=dje@watson.ibm.com \
--cc=Joe.Buck@synopsys.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=mark@codesourcery.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).