RE: linker question: rtti/exception functions

[David Korn <dkorn at pixelpower dot com>]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ruppert [mailto:ru@swb.siemens.de]
>Sent: 14 February 2002 09:20


>Now, I have found the following: defining a trivial (i.e. empty) destructor

>introduces a reference to __builtin_delete from libgcc.a, and this in turn 
>references __throw and so on... This explains how these modules from 
>libgcc.a are pulled in. 
>
>What I don't understand is the reason for this reference to 
>__builtin_delete.
>What puzzles me is that an empty destructor invokes (or at least somehow
>references) a memory management function. I do not use new() or delete()
>in my test example; I simply declared a object in global scope.
>
>Any idea?

  Yeah.  Gcc is being stupid.  Just declare a dummy stub

       void __builtin_delete (void) {}

and be done with it!

      hth,
         DaveK
-- 
Burn your ID card!  http://www.optional-identity.org.uk/
Help support the campaign, copy this into your .sig!


**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

www.mimesweeper.com
**********************************************************************

------
Want more information?  See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com