On 31 May 2012 22:35, James Y Knight wrote: > You've missed at least one ABI incompatibility in GCC 4.7 and later, as > demonstrated in real life by (at least) libboost_python, and distilled > into this test case. > > At least these bug reports are probably caused by this ABI incompatibility: > https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/6919 > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53455 > https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/6895 > > As I've said before, I really wish GCC devs would take the ABI > incompatibility problem more seriously.
What do you expect us to do, not implement C++11? > Lots of users have already started > using -std=c++0x mode, and have absolutely no idea that it's completely > unsafe to do so on a normal linux distro, linking against regular C++ > libraries that are not compiled with a) c++11 enabled, and b) the exact > same version of GCC. > > I understand that the ABI changes generally cannot be avoided, but a lot > of pain for a lot of people could be avoided by making things fail > obviously with a link error, instead of sometimes, arbitrarily, if you're > lucky, you'll get a segfault at runtime. Do you have any suggestions for how to do that? Have you opened an enhancement request in Bugzilla?