> Alexander, > I never claimed full init priority support however FSF gcc on darwin > currently > has no init priority support at all. Since Mike wanted to sort the > destructors as > well as the constructors and this achieves usable intra-module init priority > support > for FSF gcc darwin, I don't see why we don't take advantage of it. Especially > considering that the constructors and destructors will now always be sorted > anyway. > Jack > ps We will have one advantage over clang's init priority support as we can > use -flto > to combine all of the code modules (outside of libraries) into a single one > for the > sorting of constructors/destructors. This allows the g++.dg/special/conpr-3.C > execution > test case to operate properly on darwin with -flto. Again, remember that > clang currently > at least supports init priority on a intra-module level. I am just trying to > leverage > the sorting of constructors/destructors that we added for asan to achive the > same > level of functionality in FSF gcc on darwin. >
Jack, I understand and fully support your desire for intra-module ctor/dtor priority. My comment was meant to reply to Mike (sorry for top-posting it, again), who, as far as I understood him, wanted to see full init_priority support on Darwin, which IIUC can't be implemented without the proper linker support. LTO may help as a bandaid, but I don't think this solution scales well enough yet. Alex
