https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114968
--- Comment #18 from LIU Hao <lh_mouse at 126 dot com> --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #16) > What is the reason behind > /* mingw32 atexit function is safe to use in shared libraries. Use it > to register C++ static destructors. */ > #define TARGET_CXX_USE_ATEXIT_FOR_CXA_ATEXIT hook_bool_void_true > ? > Couldn't we just drop that? I think so. We have a statically linked `atexit()` much like glibc [1]. However we have added `__cxa_atexit()` a couple of years ago, so it might be preferred. As the Windows system library does not provide `__cxa_*` routines, those functions are also linked statically, so they ignore the DSO handle parameter. [1] https://github.com/mingw-w64/mingw-w64/blob/19cf5d171f6df208b27271b40014c66d2b44e38b/mingw-w64-crt/crt/crtdll.c#L205 [2] https://github.com/mingw-w64/mingw-w64/blob/19cf5d171f6df208b27271b40014c66d2b44e38b/mingw-w64-crt/crt/cxa_atexit.c#L11 > while with __cxa_atexit one can just pass the destructor itself to the > __cxa_atexit function (indeed with slightly more instructions there because > in addition to the function pointer it needs to pass the address of the > object and __dso_handle). > But it is still smaller. Can `./configure --enable-__cxa_atexit` be safely used? Documentation says it's only available with glibc [3], but I don't see any stuff specific to glibc. [3] https://gcc.gnu.org/install/configure.html > Anyway, if there is some strong reason to keep it, I think it would be > better to avoid adding yet another GTY tree, the __cxa_throw last argument > type is the same as __cxa_atexit/__cxa_thread_atexit. Maybe it can be kept for backward compatibility.
