2011/12/12 Paolo Carlini <paolo.carl...@oracle.com>: > Hi, > >> On Mon, 12 Dec 2011, Kai Tietz wrote: >> >>> Index: gcc/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/cxxabi.h >>> =================================================================== >>> --- gcc.orig/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/cxxabi.h >>> +++ gcc/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/cxxabi.h >>> @@ -51,6 +51,10 @@ >>> #include <bits/cxxabi_tweaks.h> >>> #include <bits/cxxabi_forced.h> >>> >>> +#ifndef _GLIBCXX_USE_THISCALL_ON_DTOR >>> +typedef void (*__cxa_dtor_type) (void *); >>> +#endif >>> + >> >> >> This changes the type from a function with "C" linkage to one with "C++" >> linkage, is that on purpose? > > Humm, thanks, I didn't really spend time on what was going on *below* the > define, only to the right way to implement the mingw specific bits. I guess > moving the #ifndef a few lines down, close to the other typedef should be > the safe thing to do. That also requires adjustment in the config files, the > typedef there must be also wrapped in #ifdef __cplusplus, etc. > > Please do the Change Kai.
Ok. By looking at this, it might be better to use here a define - as you mentioned. As I would need to copy here namespace too. >> There is a type __cxa_cdtor_type a couple lines below, which also seems >> used for destructors, but that one doesn't get __thiscall, that's confusing >> (but then there's probably a reason why it wasn't used in __cxa_throw). > > No idea if it's right for mingw. Well, not sure too. Logically, if those function in cdtor list (handled in vec.cc) are constructors/destructors, then it would require thiscall for IA-32 mingw, too. By tests I see that those function stored within that list have cdecl-calling convention. Therefore I didn't touched them by this patch. Kai Kai
