Virtual Calls: Make the ABI match the implementations

[Mark Mitchell]

>>>>> "Jason" == Jason Merrill <jason at redhat.com> writes:

    Jason> Ah, I see.  I'm strongly opposed to requiring all compilers
    Jason> to do work to support their semi-compliant peers.

Even if that means that fewer compilers are compliant?  In pratice,
vendors have a unique opportunity here: because they are all shipping
new systems and new compilers, they can break the ABI.  They will not
want to do so subsequently.  They will not want to delay
time-to-market in order to provide ABI compliance -- most vendors will
not find the promise of interoperability that important.  So, the ABI
will become less valuable -- many systems will not comply.

This is a major philosophical question, and something that the ABI
committee should have a cohesive position on.

--
Mark Mitchell                   mark at codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC               http://www.codesourcery.com