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: Daniel Jacobowitz <Daniel.Jacobow...@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 05:55:02 -0800 (PST)
Local: Mon, Feb 25 2008 8:55 am
Subject: Re: Should weak hidden undefined symbol be allowed?
On Feb 25, 12:32 am, "H.J." <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote:
> For
As I've said earlier on the binutils list, if the symbol is weak, the
> foo ? foo() : puts( "foo == null, skipped." );
> if foo is hidden, compiler assumes it will be defined in the same
> leaq foo(%rip), %rax
> PC relative address is used here. It will work correctly if foo is
above seems to me to be a compiler bug. > Generate a DSO with DT_TEXTREL isn't very desirable. We want
No stranger than telling it that the address of a weak symbol can be
> to avoid it if possible. It is odd to tell compiler that you can't > always > assume a hidden symbol will be defined in the same component > when you access it. NULL. 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.
| |||||||||||||