Re: [RFA] Revised C++ ABI abstraction patches

[Daniel Berlin <dan at www dot cgsoftware dot com>]

No need, it can be auto-detected.

I just sent jim my revised revised revised patch, whic, among other
things, lets you switch between the ABI's on the fly.
I have one more function that needs abstracting before i submit it to 
gdb-patches.

--Dan


On Thu, 15 Mar 2001, Fernando Nasser wrote:

> What about a configuration option  --with-v3abi (or something of a
> sort)?
> 
> Default no for 5.1, default on afterwards.
> 
> Fernando
> 
> Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, 15 Mar 2001, Jim Blandy wrote:
> > 
> > > They're not fit to be applied yet, since we don't yet automatically
> > > detect whether the executable uses the V3 or V2 ABI.
> > 
> > If it's important for users to be able to support the new ABI, you could
> > add a command which tells GDB which ABI to expect, no?
> > 
> > >       * cp-abi-gnu-v2.c (gnu_v2_destructor_prefix_p,
> > [...]
> > >       (gnu-v3-abi.o): Add.
> > >       (gnu-v2-abi.o): Add.
> > 
> > So what is it: cp-abi-gnu-v2 or gnu-v2-abi?  I prefer the latter, and I
> > thought that was the conclusion of the earlier discussions about that.
> 
> -- 
> Fernando Nasser
> Red Hat Canada Ltd.                     E-Mail:  fnasser@redhat.com
> 2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300
> Toronto, Ontario   M4P 2C9
>