* Question on _GLIBCXX_HOSTED macro libstdc++ and libsupc++
@ 2011-09-23 8:14 Amker.Cheng
2011-09-23 8:22 ` Jonathan Wakely
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Amker.Cheng @ 2011-09-23 8:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc
Hi,
In libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/eh_term_handler.cc, it says by default the
demangler things are pulled in,
according to whether _GLIBCXX_HOSTED is defined. the demangler
exception terminating handler
are really big, especially for embedded system.
Secondly, _GLIBCXX_HOSTED is now defined if --enable-hosted-libstdcxx
is given(by default it is).
This option also controls whether libstdc++.a itself is built for target system.
So, for an embedded system, how could I provide the earlier "silent
death" handler by defining _GLIBCXX_HOSTED,
also with libstdc++ built?
Any suggestion? Thanks in advance.
FYI, all above are talking about cross-toolchain.
--
Best Regards.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Question on _GLIBCXX_HOSTED macro libstdc++ and libsupc++
2011-09-23 8:14 Question on _GLIBCXX_HOSTED macro libstdc++ and libsupc++ Amker.Cheng
@ 2011-09-23 8:22 ` Jonathan Wakely
2011-09-23 8:57 ` Amker.Cheng
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Jonathan Wakely @ 2011-09-23 8:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Amker.Cheng; +Cc: gcc, Sebastian Huber
On 23 September 2011 09:14, Amker.Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/eh_term_handler.cc, it says by default the
> demangler things are pulled in,
> according to whether _GLIBCXX_HOSTED is defined. the demangler
> exception terminating handler
> are really big, especially for embedded system.
>
> Secondly, _GLIBCXX_HOSTED is now defined if --enable-hosted-libstdcxx
> is given(by default it is).
> This option also controls whether libstdc++.a itself is built for target system.
>
> So, for an embedded system, how could I provide the earlier "silent
> death" handler by defining _GLIBCXX_HOSTED,
> also with libstdc++ built?
>
> Any suggestion? Thanks in advance.
> FYI, all above are talking about cross-toolchain.
(Any reason this wasn't sent to the libstdc++ list?)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43852 proposes a "quiet
mode" which would reduce code size by disabling some of the code in
eh_term_handler.cc and pure.cc - would that do what you want?
I've not had time to do anything about it, but I think Sebastian
(CC'd) has a copyright assignment in place now, and he's provided a
patch implementing it.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Question on _GLIBCXX_HOSTED macro libstdc++ and libsupc++
2011-09-23 8:22 ` Jonathan Wakely
@ 2011-09-23 8:57 ` Amker.Cheng
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Amker.Cheng @ 2011-09-23 8:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jonathan Wakely; +Cc: gcc, Sebastian Huber, libstdc++
> (Any reason this wasn't sent to the libstdc++ list?)
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43852 proposes a "quiet
> mode" which would reduce code size by disabling some of the code in
> eh_term_handler.cc and pure.cc - would that do what you want?
>
> I've not had time to do anything about it, but I think Sebastian
> (CC'd) has a copyright assignment in place now, and he's provided a
> patch implementing it.
>
Sorry for missing the list, cced now.
It is exactly what I meant, thanks very much.
--
Best Regards.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-09-23 8:57 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-09-23 8:14 Question on _GLIBCXX_HOSTED macro libstdc++ and libsupc++ Amker.Cheng
2011-09-23 8:22 ` Jonathan Wakely
2011-09-23 8:57 ` Amker.Cheng
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).