Hello Michael,
On Thu Oct 06, 2005 15:54, Michael Veksler wrote:
[..]
>> 2. I think that it will break C. As I remember, it is sometimes
>> legal in C (or in some dialects of C) to have conflicting types.
>> You may define in one translation unit:
>> char var[5];
>> and the
On Thu Oct 06, 2005 14:50, Robert Dewar wrote:
>> [..]
>>
>> I actually disagree with this, I think attempting to make the link fail
>> here would be a mistake.
Why do you think that this would be a mistake?
WR
nimum). The assertion will show that.
I tested that on Windows with Visual C++ as well and there main.obj doesn't
link because the variable type is part of the symbol name and everthing is
fine.
I think it would be very very important for the binary interface to have that
feature as well.
Regards,
Wolfgang Roemer
Hello,
so it seems as if it would be best if I post that to the binutils mailing
list. Agreed?
WR
On Thu Oct 06, 2005 11:57, Robert Dewar wrote:
>> Michael Veksler wrote:
>> > It sounds as if the symbol is still "maximum" and it is annotated with
>> > its type (something like debug informati
Hello Michael,
first of all: Thanks for the fast reply!
On Thu Oct 06, 2005 10:33, you wrote:
>> [..]
>>
>> It's a feature. It is undefined behavior to have conflicting declarations
>> in different translation units.
>> [...]
Well, but shouldn't there at least be a warning during linking!?
>
rtant for the binary interface (ELF here,
or?) to have that feature as well. What do you think?
Regards,
Wolfgang Roemer
