linker question: rtti/exception functions

David Korn dkorn@pixelpower.com
Thu Feb 14 08:32:00 GMT 2002


>-----Original Message-----
>From: querbach@realtime.bc.ca [mailto:querbach@realtime.bc.ca]
>Sent: 14 February 2002 16:29

>If that's not acceptable, you could just stub out the 
>offending functions:
>
>  void operator delete(void*) { } 
>
>  void operator delete[](void*) { }
>
>If you look at the resulting assembler code, you'll find that these
>functions are actually called __builtin_delete and __builtin_vec_delete at
>the assembler level.

  Oops!  Yes, my earlier suggestion

    void __builtin_delete (void) {}

should either be placed in a .c file, or declared/defined as

 extern "C" void __builtin_delete (void) {}

if in a .cpp

         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



More information about the crossgcc mailing list