From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-12-12 04:52:12
David Abrahams wrote:
> The documentation in http://boost.org/more/separate_compilation.html
> states that:
> these headers fix the ABI to the default used by the compiler, and
> if the user attempts to compile the source with any other setting
> then they will get compiler errors if there are any conflicts.
> If these headers really fix the ABI to the compiler's *default*, is
> there any point in creating all these libraries with special mangled
> names? Does the documentation really mean to say the headers fix the
> ABI to the settings with which we build the Boost binaries (or
> something like that)? Or have I misunderstood this whole thing?
What I was trying to say (perhaps not very well) was:
* If you're using the compiler default settings these headers have no
* If you're not using the default settings, and the library doesn't use
these headers you get hard to track down binary compatibitity problems.
*If you're not using the defaults, and the library does use these headers,
then the ABI for the library gets forced to match the compilers default
settings - the same setting we use to build the library with - and
everything should just plain work.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk