On Thu, Jun 8, 2023 at 3:14 PM Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > On Fri, 26 May 2023 at 10:58, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > > > > > > On Wed, 24 May 2023 at 19:56, Jason Merrill via Libstdc++ < > > libstd...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > > >> Middle-end folks: any thoughts about how best to make the change > >> described in > >> the last paragraph below? > >> > >> Library folks: any thoughts on the changes to __cxa_call_terminate? > >> > > > > I see no harm in exporting it (with the adjusted signature). The "looks > > standard but isn't" name is a little unfortunate, but not a big deal. > > > > Jason, do you have any objection to exporting __cxa_call_terminate for GCC > 13.2 as well, even though the FE won't use it? > > Currently both gcc-13 and trunk are at the same library version, > libstdc++.so.6.0.32 > > But with this addition to trunk we need to bump that .32 to .33, meaning > that gcc-13 and trunk diverge. If we want to backport any new symbols from > trunk to gcc-13 that gets trickier once they've diverged.
But if you backport any new used symbol you have to bump the version anyway. So why not bump now (on trunk)? > If we added __cxa_call_terminate to gcc-13, making it another new addition > to libstdc++.so.6.0.32, then it would simplify a few things. > > In theory it could be a problem for distros already shipping gcc-13.1.1 > with that new libstdc++.so.6.0.32 version, but since the > __cxa_call_terminate symbol won't actually be used by the gcc-13.1.1 > compilers, I don't think it will be a problem.
