From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Edelsohn To: Joe Buck Cc: mark@codesourcery.com (Mark Mitchell), gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: C++ ABI Issues Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 18:32:00 -0000 Message-id: <200208270132.VAA29998@makai.watson.ibm.com> References: <200208270010.RAA17413@atrus.synopsys.com> X-SW-Source: 2002-08/msg01660.html >>>>> 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