The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 |
From: Cary Coutant <ccout...@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 14:10:44 -0800
Local: Mon, Feb 25 2008 5:10 pm
Subject: Re: Should weak hidden undefined symbol be allowed?
> My question is if compiler can assume that a hidden symbol is A hidden symbol must be defined in the same component, *if it is > always defined in the same component. If the answer is no, > a weak hidden symbol doesn't have to be defined in the same > component, then compiler needs to be careful about weak symbol > even if it is hidden. I just want to hear what everyone thinks. defined at all*. That last part is the key to the issue. In the case of a WEAK HIDDEN UNDEF symbol, it is possible for the symbol to remain undefined (or, looked at another way, it is possible for the symbol to be defined at link time as an absolute symbol with value 0). I agree with Daniel; the compiler should be aware of this possibility and generate code that will not require a dynamic relocation for this case. -cary You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| |||||||||||||