------- Comment #14 from developer at sandoe-acoustics dot co dot uk 2009-09-23 16:36 ------- (In reply to comment #12) > However your current > approach isn't scalable (which was Mike's complaint).
anything that requires an action per added function is "non-scalable" in that way. the only action needed for the _ext is to list the function in gcc/config/darwin-libgcc-ext-32B-10.X.ver and friends. (OK there's an addition for each darwin release where the content of libgcc_s changes - but there would be a change to add a new macro for the other mechanism) the effort required of wrapping the function exports in a #define NOT_HERE_BEFORE_10_X macro is probably typographically similar .. but more intrusive in the source code. However, I don't claim to understand the full range of options available from ld; So (after putting out the current fire) I'd like to take a look at that (anyone else welcome to do it first ;)) Apropos "extra compile flags" this was only to hide the new feature behind something for test purposes -- clearly if the process were adopted the flag would not be needed. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39888