Re: [Boost-users] MSVC _SECURE_SCL causes ABI change, ODR violation - mangle library names?

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] MSVC _SECURE_SCL causes ABI change, ODR violation - mangle library names?
From: Hansi (hansipet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-10-10 14:06:16

I think also that it would be really important that also this versions 
are build. so everyone can use what he wants . Otherwhise it is really 
hard to find errors like this ones...

Best regards
Hansjörg

Jean-Francois Bastien schrieb:
> The _SECURE_SCL macro in Visual Studio's (Dinkumware's) STL changes the
> ABI for standard types, which causes silent ODR violations when Boost
> static libraries and the main program linking with them don't define
> this macro the same way. This problem manifests itself as runtime
> crashes.
> 
> There's been discussion before (see links at the end) to solve this by
> using different library names in the build system to distinguish
> different ABIs. The discussions brought up issues:
>  - _SECURE_SCL implies a performance cost.
>  - _SECURE_SCL might not be conformant with the complexity requirements
> (no clear conclusion was reached on this).
>  - Should the compiler's default behaviour be Boost's default (i.e.
> _SECURE_SCL isn't defined)?
>  - The Windows version of the Intel compiler has a bug around partial
> function template ordering which can be solved by defining _SECURE_SCL
> to 0.
> 
> There's already a Trac issue for this:
> http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/2086
> 
> Could we reach a consensus on adding this to the library name mangling?
> 
> Is it too late for 1.37.0?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> JF
> 
> 
> References:
> 
> msvc toolset addition stl-security-theater
> http://lists.boost.org/boost-build/2008/09/index.php#20072
> 
> High Cost of MS "Safe" STL for Release Builds
> http://lists.boost.org/boost-build/2008/04/18828.php
> 
> System: error_code.cpp #definesmacroswithoutchecking if already defined
> http://lists.boost.org/boost-build/2008/04/18754.php
> 
> What plans to handle _SCEURE_SCL in the boost build system?
> http://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2008/04/index.php#136481
> 
> Intel compiler - does anyone care?
> http://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2008/01/index.php#132079
> 
> bjam define=_SECURE_SCL shows no effect
> http://lists.boost.org/boost-users/2007/05/index.php#27928
> 
> Bug/Incompatibility: Visual C++ 2005 checkediteratorslead to major
> crashes
> http://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2006/06/index.php#106415
> 
> vc 8 secure stl/runtime and boost 
> http://lists.boost.org/boost-users/2005/12/index.php#15843