On 14 abr, 22:56, Paul Pluzhnikov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephen Banville) writes:
> > 'm looking to find out if there are any ABI differences between the
> > VxWorks 3.3 and 3.3.2 tool chains regarding C++isms.
>
> No idea about these specific tool chains, but it is my und
Pedro,
Thank you for your response.
I was told by a person at Code Soucery that the ABI specification is the same
but there are differences specifically with name mangling and templates. It
sounds like what you are telling me is that GCC developers will most likelt not
change the ABI between su
"Pedro Lamarão" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> IIRC, there was an ABI change from 3.1 to 3.2, and that was the last C+
> + ABI change.
That was definitely not the last ABI change.
The ABI changed between 2.9x, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4.
AFAICT, 3.4 ABI is current (i.e. didn't change going to 4.0
Paul Pluzhnikov wrote:
"Pedro Lamarão" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
IIRC, there was an ABI change from 3.1 to 3.2, and that was the last C+
+ ABI change.
That was definitely not the last ABI change.
The ABI changed between 2.9x, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4.
AFAICT, 3.4 ABI is current (i.e. did
red floyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Paul Pluzhnikov wrote:
>> The ABI changed between 2.9x, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4.
>> AFAICT, 3.4 ABI is current (i.e. didn't change going to 4.0, 4.1
>> and 4.2).
>
> Also, isn't there a command line option to specify ABI level?
>From "info gcc" for gcc-
Very interesting.
Thank you very much for your reply.
Steve
-- Original message --
From: Paul Pluzhnikov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> red floyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Paul Pluzhnikov wrote:
>
> >> The ABI changed between 2.9x, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4.
> >
