majnemer added a comment. In http://reviews.llvm.org/D12512#236987, @EricWF wrote:
> In http://reviews.llvm.org/D12512#236984, @majnemer wrote: > > > Wouldn't this change be problematic if you threw to code which was > > statically linked with a prior version of libcxxabi? > > > How do you mean? As in you have two different versions of libc++abi linked > into one executable? If so your already in bad shape. Say you have two binaries, foo.exe and bar.so. Foo.exe statically links against an older libc++abi and bar.so links against a newer libc++abi. In this instance, our program has two copies of libc++abi statically linked with no ill effects and such a scenario was supported before this patch (at least AFAICT). However, we might have problems after this patch if foo.exe is linked against a newer static library than bar.so http://reviews.llvm.org/D12512 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
