David Abrahams wrote: >>- ccpython.cc and linking with g++ is removed entirely. or, > > > That would be bad for C++ users on HP/UX. Is that acceptable?
I hadn't read that far in the threads when I wrote this - I guess the answer is no, and we must continue to support ccpython.cc. >>- the logic is fixed so that linking with g++ is only done if >> main is in ccpython.o > > > I don't see how that works. Somehow we need to decide whether to put > main in ccpython.o in the first place, don't we? Yes, that is done through --with-cxx (alone). However, the decision to use CXX for linking is independent on whether --with-cxx was given. >>- the configure test is extended to better match current g++ >> behaviour. > > > What do you have in mind? Somebody reported that the test works better for g++ if the function is marked extern "C". This should be done for 2.4 regardless of any other change. >>I just checked, and it seems that the logic in use is still somewhat >>different. If the configure test determines that a C++ main() >>must be linked with CXX, it unconditionally changes the linker to CXX. >>The test, in turn, is run always if a C++ compiler was found, >>i.e. independently of whether --with-cxx was provided. > > > That doesn't match up with reports from my testers who say they can > run with C++ extension modules from many different GCC versions if > they just configure their Python --without-cxx. If what you were > saying were true, wouldn't --without-cxx be ignored on ELF/Linux? Ok, it's still different. I see three cases now: 1. --without-cxx or --with-cxx=no specified. configure does not look for a C++ compiler, and does not check whether linking needs to be done with a C++ compiler, and decides to use Modules/python.c. 2. --with-cxx not given. configure does look for a C++ compiler, and does check whether linking with the C++ compiler is necessary, and still uses Modules/python.c 3. --with-cxx is given. configure requires it to point to a C++ compiler, performs the linking check, and uses Modules/ccpython.cc. It would help discussion if you would use the actual code, too, instead of just using reports from your testers. Regards, Martin _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com