------- Comment #84 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2005-11-01 04:30 ------- Subject: Re: libstdc++ headers should have pop/push of the visibility around the declarations
On 31/10/2005, at 7:59 PM, bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > Geoff, it's not as simple as just marking throwable types, all > typeinfo, etc. > I'm performing an audit, but it's stuff like local statics as well. > Right, I wasn't trying to say that just marking the throwable types would be a complete solution (for anyone), just that it was easy, clearly correct as far as it went, and it would reduce the problem. > This has to be done very carefully for a C++ library, which isn't > as clearly defined as C libraries that are already using this > feature (but that don't have to deal with vague linkage.) > Plus, we don't really know what it should mean yet. For instance, if everything is compiled with visibility hidden, and dylib A throws "vector<int>", should that be catchable in dylib B? I can think of good arguments for "yes", "no", and "undefined", which I guess means that "undefined" should win. ------- Comment #85 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2005-11-01 04:30 ------- Created an attachment (id=10094) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10094&action=view) -- 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]
