Re: Next C++ transition
On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 07:43:23PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@debian.org> writes:
>
> >> The soname of libstdc++ changed upstream from 3.3. and 3.4, and the
> >> compiler implements a somewhat different flavor of C++ (it's much
> >> closer to the standard now).
> >
> > However, with symbol versioning and shared libgcc implemented in both
> > 3.3 and 3.4, I don't think a transition is actually necessary - I
> > believe things will work OK with both versions linked in. For most
> > architectures, at least.
> >
> > Do you have some reason to think this is wrong?
>
> I don't think this will work in general because a DSO might expose the
> layout of objects provided by the standard library in its public
> interface. That's part of the reason why I think that symbol
> versioning is way overrated in some circles. 8-)
>
> However, if the library just exports a C API, it should be okay.
Not only this, but in fact, the layout of nearly every object exposed
by the standard library hasn't changed. So in practice, I expect it to
work :)
Not the most confidence-inspiring, perhaps.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
Reply to: