Danny Smith wrote: > is a good thing: replace an ISO standard-conformant and perfectly > adequate atexit function already supplied by OS vendor with a new > version, perhaps with some licensing strings attached. I expect the > fake cxa_atexit hack I illustrated earlier would meet less resistance, > and that is why I considered it the easier option.
This change would be contained in crt?.o & dllcrt?.o, no? So that would mean it would get statically linked, with no additional runtime dependency. Assuming it was licensed the same way as the rest of the existing CRT startup code, I don't see how anyone could complain. It would give us proper __cxa_atexit support for essentially free. Brian
