Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 25th Jun 2007 20:30 UTC, submitted by Nitsudima
Thread beginning with comment 250667
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: UNIX-likes boring?
by Mike Pavone on Tue 26th Jun 2007 20:36
in reply to "RE[2]: UNIX-likes boring?"
The ABI was changed to comply with the cross-vendor C++ ABI. It wasn't like the GCC guys sat down one day and said "Hey you know what, let's change the C++ ABI for the hell of it. That'll really annoy everyone!"
Well technically GCC 3.X and later use the name mangling scheme dictated by the IA64 ABI. It's hardly a standard on other processor architectures (though from what I gather, Intel's C++ compiler uses it for x86 as well, but this is unsurprising since Intel is responsible for the IA64 ABI).
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_mangling#How_different_compilers_...
You would think they would have left an option for the old way, but perhaps they made other ABI changes (like the way exceptions are handled) that would have made having a proper backwards compatability option practical.
RE[4]: UNIX-likes boring?
by Vanders on Wed 27th Jun 2007 06:52
in reply to "RE[3]: UNIX-likes boring?"
Well, the IA64 ABI is the Cross Vendor ABI. See http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/libstdc++-html-USERS-3.3/na...
"GCC subscribes to a relatively-new cross-vendor ABI for C++, sometimes called the IA64 ABI because it happens to be the native ABI for that platform."






Member since:
2005-07-06
The ABI was changed to comply with the cross-vendor C++ ABI. It wasn't like the GCC guys sat down one day and said "Hey you know what, let's change the C++ ABI for the hell of it. That'll really annoy everyone!"