On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis <g...@integrable-solutions.net> wrote: > On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 6:55 AM, Richard Guenther > <richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 5:18 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis >> <g...@integrable-solutions.net> wrote: >>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Duncan Sands <baldr...@free.fr> wrote: >>>> Hi Gabriel, >>>> >>>>>>> Richard just reminded me that we have two fancy_aborts. >>>>>>> Could you tell which one your code is indirectly using? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> the one installed as plugin/include/system.h, which seems to be >>>>>> gcc/include/system.h. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> OK. I think that declaration has to have the C language spec. >>>>> Would you prepare a patch for that? >>>> >>>> >>>> you mean: wrap the fancy_abort declaration in system.h in 'extern C'? >>> >>> Yes. Thanks. >> >> I don't think that's correct - if GCC is built with a C++ compiler >> fancy_abort has >> C++ linkage. > > But tthen, that would prevent a C plugins from working, as Duncan > initially reported.
Well, sure. No design part of the (basically not existent) plugin API caters for mixing C++/C C/C++ plugin vs. GCC. Trying to paper over a single issue is not a way to make that magically work. Richard.
