--- Comment #9 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-20 18:21 ---
Not a bug; see my earlier comment.
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-13 23:28 ---
Either 20218 is a bug or this is. It seems to me that 20218 is the bug.
If you declare a function to be hidden, you are asserting that it will be
defined in the current DSO. From the GCC documentation:
"Two declara
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||pluto at agmk dot net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22592
--- Additional Comments From jh at suse dot cz 2005-09-03 10:51 ---
Subject: Re: -fvisibility-inlines-hidden broken differently
>
> --- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-03
> 01:03 ---
> Frankly, I think -fvisibility-inlines-hidden is a bad idea
--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-03
01:03 ---
Frankly, I think -fvisibility-inlines-hidden is a bad idea. I don't feel that
way about -fvisibility, but giving inline functions special linkage in this way
is a very fragile concept, and awards something
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||trapni at gentoo dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22592
--- Additional Comments From matz at suse dot de 2005-07-27 13:46 ---
Because these symbols indeed are not defined anywhere. On linux this happens
to work, but on darwin you need to link against something which provides them.
So you would need to create a library which implements
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
20:51 ---
I still don't think this is a bug as if I compile the library on ppc-darwin, we
get the following link error
even without -fvisibility=hidden/-fvisibility-inlines-hidden:
ld: Undefined symbols:
__ZNK1AneER
--- Additional Comments From matz at suse dot de 2005-07-22 12:46 ---
I don't understand. The code itself is perfectly valid C++, I don't think
you mean that it's invalid, right? Yes, operator== is also hidden, but
there is no definition for it in this unit, hence GCC generates the c
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-21
16:39 ---
No I think this code is in fact invalid and should error out like this. Note
you also declared operator==
as being hidden too. So if you call that, it would break too.
--
What|Removed
10 matches
Mail list logo
