From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-07-04 19:37:37
At 02:44 AM 7/3/2003, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
>On Friday, July 04, 2003 12:38 AM [GMT+1=CET],
>David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> On the other hand if your native compiler is GCC and your system was
>>> not configured with that setting, then you may get into trouble --
>>> since you'll be mixing translation units with different ABIs.
>> Furthermore, that sounds like a workaround. Isn't it still a
>> compiler bug that it doesn't work without -fabi-version=0?
>No, it's correctly fixed, but since it's a fix that breaks ABI, the
>version number was bumbed. By default, GCC 3.3 uses the GCC 3.2 ABI.
>If you want to
>activate the new version, you have to explicitally say so.
>"-fabi-version=0" always selects the last version of the ABI.
So are you are saying we should add "-fabi-version=0"?
Will that have a negative impact on other platforms? Should it be added
only if running on Win32?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk