Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon.
Switch to the new Google Groups.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
Message from discussion Should weak hidden undefined symbol be allowed?
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:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Jim Dehnert  
View profile  
 More options Feb 25 2008, 12:05 am
From: "Jim Dehnert" <dehn...@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 21:05:57 -0800
Local: Mon, Feb 25 2008 12:05 am
Subject: Re: Should weak hidden undefined symbol be allowed?

On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 2:05 PM, H.J. <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote:

>  Should weak hidden undefined symbol be allowed? The problem is when
>  compiler sees a hidden symbol, it assumes
>  that it will be defined in the same component and optimizes its
>  access. If the hidden symbol is weak and undefined,
>  our linker won't report the error since the undefined symbol weak is
>  allowed.  Although its value is 0,  it may be
>  impossible to make its address to 0 in a shared library since the load
>  address of a shared library isn't known at
>  link-time.

Why does that matter?  That's an absolute zero, not a relative zero.

Jim

--
--
             Jim Dehnert
             dehn...@gmail.com
             dehne...@acm.org


 
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.