Re: RFC: __cxa_atexit for mingw32

Danny Smith wrote: > I have a patch that allows use of atexit for destructors in the same way > as > __cxa_atexit in cp/decl.c and decl2.c and will submit in Stage1 next. That sounds great. Thanks, -- Mark Mitchell CodeSourcery [EMAIL PROTECTED] (650) 331-3385 x713

Re: RFC: __cxa_atexit for mingw32

At Mark Mitchell wrote: > I think it would be better to adopt [mingw-targetted] G++ to use > whatever method Microsoft uses to handle static destructions. > Ultimately, I would like to see G++ support the Microsoft C++ ABI -- > unless we can conv

Re: RFC: __cxa_atexit for mingw32

Mark Mitchell writes: >As a MinGW user, I would prefer not to see __cxa_atexit added to MinGW. >I really want MinGW to provide the ability to link to MSVCRT: nothing >more, nothing less. Well, even Microsoft's compiler doesn't just to link MSVCRT.DLL (or it's successors) a certain part of C runtim

Re: RFC: __cxa_atexit for mingw32

On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 02:21:55PM -0400, Mark Mitchell wrote: > Joe Buck wrote: > > > As I understand it, Microsoft has patented aspects of their C++ class > > layout. > > That might be, and we should investigate that before actually trying to > implement a compatible layout, but it doesn't chan

Re: RFC: __cxa_atexit for mingw32

Joe Buck wrote: > As I understand it, Microsoft has patented aspects of their C++ class > layout. That might be, and we should investigate that before actually trying to implement a compatible layout, but it doesn't change my opinion about the original question regarding __cxa_atexit -- unless Mi

Re: RFC: __cxa_atexit for mingw32

On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 12:40:00PM -0400, Mark Mitchell wrote: > As a MinGW user, I would prefer not to see __cxa_atexit added to MinGW. > I really want MinGW to provide the ability to link to MSVCRT: nothing > more, nothing less. Cygwin is an excellent solution if I want a more > UNIX-like envir

Re: RFC: __cxa_atexit for mingw32

Brian Dessent wrote: >> is a good thing: replace an ISO standard-conformant and perfectly >> adequate atexit function already supplied by OS vendor with a new >> version, perhaps with some licensing strings attached. As a MinGW user, I would prefer not to see __cxa_atexit added to MinGW. I real

Re: RFC: __cxa_atexit for mingw32

Danny Smith wrote: > is a good thing: replace an ISO standard-conformant and perfectly > adequate atexit function already supplied by OS vendor with a new > version, perhaps with some licensing strings attached. I expect the > fake cxa_atexit hack I illustrated earlier would meet less resistance

RE: RFC: __cxa_atexit for mingw32

> From: Ranjit Mathew > Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2006 1:28 PM > Danny Smith wrote: > > Adding a real __cxa_atexit to mingw runtime is of course also > > possible, but I thought I'd attempt the easy options first. > > When you say "runtime", do you mean libstdc++ or something like > libmingwex.a in

Re: RFC: __cxa_atexit for mingw32

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Danny Smith wrote: > Adding a real __cxa_atexit to mingw runtime is of course also possible, > but I thought I'd attempt the easy options first. When you say "runtime", do you mean libstdc++ or something like libmingwex.a in "mingw-runtime"? If you me