From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joe Buck To: gdr@integrable-solutions.net (Gabriel Dos Reis) Cc: Joe.Buck@synopsys.COM (Joe Buck), phil@jaj.com (Phil Edwards), mark@codesourcery.com (Mark Mitchell), gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: C++ ABI Issues Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 14:50:00 -0000 Message-id: <200208272150.OAA29935@atrus.synopsys.com> References: X-SW-Source: 2002-08/msg01800.html I wrote: > | It seems that even if it does, we can preserve libstdc++'s binary > | compatibility by adding a dummy field that exactly fills up any padding. Gaby writes: > Isn't this the compiler should be doing (with appropriate flags if > necessary)? It certainly does know where to fill things. I would > certainly prefer that to clutering V3 with pad0, pad1, ... How could we do that? We'd have to either tell the compiler somehow which classes to compile in the old way and which classes to compile in the new way, or else use the 3.2 ABI for everything, forever. In practice, we may be lucky and not need to do anything at all. Let's reopen this one when we have some data.