Yong Sun wrote: > Hi, Rod, > >> I'd be careful of -Bdirect and C++. -Bdirect can result in different >> callers binding to different definitions of the same named symbol. >> This is verify often useful, and what you want to achieve. But C++ >> is littered with implementation details that expect interposition >> to occur with some of their multiply defined symbols. -Bdirect can >> break this expectation. > Would you like to give me an example of that? I'm very interested in > that :)
Well, Steve's last posting stated: The std::string<T> class template depends on having only one __null_string_ref_rep<T> in the entire program. So, I guess if two objects contained this symbol, and each object was built with -Bdirect, they would both bind to their own instance of the symbol. I guess this would be the same as using -Bsymbolic. C++ doesn't like either option. -- Rod
