From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mumit Khan To: Joe Buck Cc: egcs@cygnus.com Subject: Re: EH bug in Makefile.in Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 00:56:00 -0000 Message-id: <9710260755.AA26107@modi.xraylith.wisc.edu> References: <199710260332.UAA08639@atrus.synopsys.com> X-SW-Source: 1997-10/msg01082.html Joe Buck writes: > > Yes, I've just confirmed this (well, my gas, from 2.8.0.1.15, calls > itself 970731: is this what you meant?). I'm actually using the binutils-971023 snapshot from cygnus. Probably not a whole lot different from 2.8.0.1.15, considering how fast HJ updates these things. I needed the 971023 snapshot to get egcs working for i386-cygwin32 target and it works great (thanks to Ian Taylor for the pointer to dev snapshot). > > Pretty impressive! Question though: do folks think MRS's exception tests > cover the problem areas well, or are there other failure modes (someone > mentioned that delete is not called if a contructor for an object > allocated by new throws an exception, are there others?)? > I'm going to test some of my code tomorrow which does some of what you mention. Currently only a few compilers handle it correctly -- some EDG based ones (eg., Kai) and Intel's C++. I'll post results. > As you know, I've been eager to permit use of egcs on older Linux systems > with the egcs compiler installed in a different directory (I use > /usr/local/egcs as prefix). I'm willing to accept dropping in a new gas > to do this (I built mine without enable-shared so I just have one file to > deal with, at least until I upgrade the whole system). If it were trivial > to modify things so that an older gas would work as well, that would be > nice but it should be low priority. After suffering thru the older gas on both linux and i386-cygwin32, I'm not so sure that it's worth the backward compatibility. We're already doing this for other platforms (eg., --with-gnu-as under hpux to get debugging info), so it's probably not a big deal. One wish I have now is that g++ team revisit the question of name mangling again. Try blitz++ (and some of my own code) to see why it's becoming unmanagable -- the symbol lengths are just too damn long. I just noticed that you reposted your proposal. Let's see what happens. Mumit