On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 11:58 AM, K. Frank <[email protected]> wrote: > Again, I'm not all that big on backward compatibility, and, as noted > above, I don't understand what --enable-threads=win32 is for. But > my gut reaction is if that the gcc implementation (with > --enable-threads=win32) is sub-optimal, maybe it makes sense to > do it "right," even at the cost of backward compatibility.
If you enable something new how does it affect backward compatibility? Perhaps with-in the coding itself, in that case the coding would need some method to know when it was different. If it is a run time or library compatibility issue my suggestion to all users using a new version of a compiler is to always rebuild the library with that compiler. It rarely gets done but it is the users detriment if they do not and then have issues; i.e. not a problem I worry about. -- Earnie -- https://sites.google.com/site/earnieboyd ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Mingw-w64-public mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public
