https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117683
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to R. Diez from comment #9)
> I am now curious about why GCC itself builds without RTTI. Is it really
> worth disabling it? Or is it only a policy decision like "the GCC source
> shall not use R
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117683
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to R. Diez from comment #4)
> 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 thi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117683
--- Comment #9 from R. Diez ---
Interesting. I think that vague warning in the documentation could be
interpreted as "mixing is risky and/or discouraged" and should be rephrased.
After all, at least some level of mixing is apparently safe.
I am
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117683
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117683
--- Comment #7 from R. Diez ---
About using C++ exceptions without RTTI, I tried to build a toolchain for ARM
(arm-none-eabi) with -fno-rtti, and I got the following compilation errors
(they may be more):
File eh_arm.cc:
[...]/gcc-14.2.0/libst
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117683
--- Comment #6 from R. Diez ---
I do not understand why you say that RTTI "names" merely need to be unique.
The specification for "const char* name() const;", which I quoted in my first
post, says "the returned string can be identical for sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117683
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||lto, missed-optimization
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117683
--- Comment #4 from R. Diez ---
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
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117683
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Andrew said RTTI, not exceptions. You can still use exceptions with -fno-rtti.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117683
--- Comment #2 from R. Diez ---
> You know most places which are size constraints ban the use of RTTI.
Popular belief is often wrong. See here for details:
https://github.com/rdiez/DebugDue?tab=readme-ov-file#about-c-exceptions
I am actually
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117683
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Keywords|
11 matches
Mail list logo
