On Fri, Apr 16, 2004 at 02:21:11PM -0500, Albert Chin wrote: > On Thu, Apr 15, 2004 at 11:10:20AM -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > > If a program which is based on C language depends on a library which > > is implemented in C++, the C++ compiler should be used to link the > > program. Otherwise C++ static initialization may not work right, or > > linking may fail entirely. Libtool doesn't currently offer any > > provision to do that. > > > > The installed .la file for a C++ library does not indicate the > > implementation language, or what linker should be used. When the C++ > > library was built using modern GCC then libstdc++.la is listed as a > > library dependency so at some clue may be gleaned from that fact. > > > > It seems to me that this is a fundamental flaw in muti-lingual libtool > > as it exists today. > > Shouldn't the developer be responsible for using the C++ compiler > rather than the C compiler? Why should libtool solve this? Without > libtool, the developer should be using the C++ compiler to link > anyway.
Imagine the scenario in which a software package may optionally depend on libraries to extend its capabilities. Everyone is merrily using the C compiler, until the day it turns out that one of those optional libraries is written in C++, then everything suddenly must be linked with C++? Is it a goal for libtool to be able to scrape together object files compiled from multiple languages together into one executable? (--tag=FORTRAN -lfortlib --tag=C++ -lsomecxxlib ?) Cheers, Patrick _______________________________________________ Libtool mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
