On Sep 21, 2013, at 5:53 PM, Chandler Carruth <[email protected]> wrote:

> 
> On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 2:48 PM, Howard Hinnant <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> I really like this patch.  It is a nice piece of work.  Unfortunately I think 
> I'm going to have to decline it for ABI reasons.
> 
> Ouch.
> 
> Do you see any path forward here or solution to preserve ABI? We ran into a 
> nontrivial amount of code which ended up relying on this.

The easiest thing I can think of is to wait until libc++ is ready to make ABI 
breaking changes across the board, and then increment _LIBCPP_ABI_VERSION.

I've wondered if Peter's fix would work if we gratuitously restored the 
unneeded template parameter on __deque_iterator just for the purpose of ABI 
stability.  I don't know the answer to this question, and won't personally have 
time to investigate it at this time.

Howard


_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to