On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 02:33:30PM -0600, John Hasler wrote: > Why don't standard ABIs suffice? Not that I'm necessarily arguing in favour of a set of common packages, but defining an ABI is not a sufficient condition to ensure compatibility. Consider a function int s(int, int) -- you can have two ABI-compatible versions of this, one that adds it's arguments and one that multiplies them. ABI compatible, but different results. I'm not expecting that there'll be anything different to that degree in the LCC-defined packages, but pretty much any change in a library would have the effect of changing the way that library operates in some fashion -- and who's to say that some program isn't relying on the former (buggy) operation of the library? - Matt
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature