https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117683
--- Comment #4 from R. Diez <rdiez-2006 at rd10 dot de> --- You are right, I'm sorry I got mixed up. Must have been memories of a distant past. I still see no reason to lose typeid and some dynamic_cast scenarios though. It's only the names of the classes that are useless (at least in my scenario). The rest of the type information does not seem to take up much space. But now I want to try -fno-rtti with my firmware. I wonder whether I should rebuild the toolchain with -fno-rtti, as I gather that libstdc++ and maybe other things need to be compiled with the same (or compatible) flags. I also wonder whether I can mix code with and without RTTI. Maybe I only need RTTI in some modules. Can a -fno-rtti toolchain be used in that scenario? The GCC manual is rather vague about mixing: "Mixing code compiled with -frtti with that compiled with -fno-rtti may not work. For example, programs may fail to link if a class compiled with -fno-rtti is used as a base for a class compiled with -frtti." That statement only gives an example about a linking error, which would be pretty harmless. Should I expect more serious trouble at runtime?
