On Aug 13, 2014, at 3:05 PM, Nelson, Clark <[email protected]> wrote: >> I agree that this is a problem; we shouldn't "standardize" >> something that a vendor doesn't feel they can reasonably adopt. >> >> We could document it as a recommendation, I suppose. > > Technically, if the ABI doesn't actually nail it down, then it's not really > part of the ABI, is it?
We’ve discussed having recommendations in the document before; I don’t recall what they were specifically for. > But it doesn't have to be part of the ABI for G++ to allow it and do > something for it. This is clearly the right way for any vendor who wants to accept non-POD variadic arguments to do it: no solution involving memcpy can be correct for all types, and doing something MSVC-like but only for variadics would be very strange. I think that’s worth documenting. John. _______________________________________________ cxx-abi-dev mailing list [email protected] http://sourcerytools.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cxx-abi-dev
