rtant for the binary interface (ELF here,
or?) to have that feature as well. What do you think?
Regards,
Wolfgang Roemer
Hello Michael,
first of all: Thanks for the fast reply!
On Thu Oct 06, 2005 10:33, you wrote:
>> [..]
>>
>> It's a feature. It is undefined behavior to have conflicting declarations
>> in different translation units.
>> [...]
Well, but shouldn't there at least be a warning during linking!?
>
Hello,
so it seems as if it would be best if I post that to the binutils mailing
list. Agreed?
WR
On Thu Oct 06, 2005 11:57, Robert Dewar wrote:
>> Michael Veksler wrote:
>> > It sounds as if the symbol is still "maximum" and it is annotated with
>> > its type (something like debug informati
nimum). The assertion will show that.
I tested that on Windows with Visual C++ as well and there main.obj doesn't
link because the variable type is part of the symbol name and everthing is
fine.
I think it would be very very important for the binary interface to have that
feature as well.
Regards,
Wolfgang Roemer
On Thu Oct 06, 2005 14:50, Robert Dewar wrote:
>> [..]
>>
>> I actually disagree with this, I think attempting to make the link fail
>> here would be a mistake.
Why do you think that this would be a mistake?
WR
Hello Michael,
On Thu Oct 06, 2005 15:54, Michael Veksler wrote:
[..]
>> 2. I think that it will break C. As I remember, it is sometimes
>> legal in C (or in some dialects of C) to have conflicting types.
>> You may define in one translation unit:
>> char var[5];
>> and the
