[RFC] C++1x breaking the ABI in one more place :(

[Joe Buck]

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 06:29:18PM -0700, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 8:26 PM, Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> > Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> >
> >> The bad reputation G++ has cultivated does not come from situation
> >> remotely close to what the original patch was about. Â G++ bad reputation
> >> comes extensions that were introduced without much thought about
> >> interactions, and that were removed later, etc. Â The concrete
> >> situation at hand comes from a change in the C++ standard itself.
> >> We should not be conflating the two. Â Otherwise, we lose credibility.
> >
> > You're entitled to your opinion, of course. Â But, my opinion is that if
> 
> That the change comes from the definition of C++ itself is not
> an opinion.  It is a fact.

What do you propose, then?  One library for the older standard and one
for the newer?  How else to support both existing binary executables,
and code that uses the latest standard?