On 16 April 2014 06:58, Marc Glisse wrote: > On Tue, 15 Apr 2014, Paolo Carlini wrote: > >> Anyway, the real issue is indeed that implementing those bits requires a >> new virtual function, and that would break the ABI. > > > What is the status of the ABI half-break plan (abi_tag and such), necessary > to get the remaining pieces of C++11?
It's happening. I'm working on it this week and hope to post patches for discussion pretty soon. The plan is to default to new, abi_tagged versions of all classes that need an incompatible change. Users will be allowed to select the old version of classes using single macro to get the old versions of everything, or more fine-grained macros to get the old locales/streams but new std::list, for example. Any affected symbols exported from the library will need to be compiled twice and exported twice, using the old and new mangled names.
