------- Comment #79 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2005-10-31 22:14 ------- Subject: Re: libstdc++ headers should have pop/push of the visibility around the declarations
On 31/10/2005, at 10:37 AM, ismail at uludag dot org dot tr wrote: > ------- Comment #78 from ismail at uludag dot org dot tr > 2005-10-31 18:37 ------- > Paolo, this is surely a bug fix. Why can't it make it to 4.1 ? > Waiting for 4.2 > means that unpatched gcc's will suffer for more. > I don't think the problem is solved yet, is it? In addition to the question of whether the patch is actually safe for all architectures, there's also still the question of using standard library templates, like 'vector', on hidden types; this works now if you use - fvisibility=hidden, and it'd stop working if the patch was applied, so you'd just be trading one problem for another. Better I think to not make this change in 4.1, at least that can't introduce any regressions, and work on the problem for 4.2. However, maybe the problem would be much reduced if we marked some specific classes as not hidden: those which are thrown as exceptions. There are only a handful of them, so we could do that with just an attribute, and surely that would be safe. What do people think of that? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19664 ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
