Micha Nelissen wrote:
Peter Vreman wrote:
That is impossible. The linker is 'stupid' in that sence. And it also
should not be trying to be smart. Otherwise it will fail in other
situations. Maybe you remember what the (currently disabled) VMT
optimizer
did for the LCL. It removed methods that the LCL expected to be there.
That's a bug in the LCL IMHO. We shouldn't be messing around with
internals.
It isn't really doing much with the internals. I've to admit that
nowadays better solutions are available, but thats something different.
The case shows that users can do this. There is no language construct
that forbids it. So optimizing this with a smart linker may break such
code. Problem only is till what level should a smart linker detect this.
IMO, ppl will always be smarter and find a valid case where things get
broken.
Marc
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
