Today, 12 minutes, 50 seconds ago, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > This way you compile your whole program using the C++ compiler, i.e. you > actually are compiling it as a C++ program, not as a c-program. Right. But it doesn't hurt much (wrt. mangled symbol names, for instance) so long as you are compiling a program, not a library. [...] > This only works with some (old) versions of gcc for some selected > targets (eg. gcc-2.9x on i386). In general (esp. with gcc >= 3.0), it > does not work. G++ 3.0.2 on i386 has `libstdc++' too. From my understanding of http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/faq/index.html (especially 5.2), `libstdc++' won't disappear from G++. Were you talking about `libg++'? > > but other C++ > > environments do not necessarily have `libstdc++'). In order to link > > against a C++ library without having a C++ compiler, one needs to have > > `libstdc++' (or equivalent) statically linked into the C++ library. > Sorry, this is not true. > > With g++, in general, you have to use "g++" to link and must not > explicitly add "-lstdc++". Admitted, there exist some occasions for some > apps/libs on some architectures for some versions of gcc where the trick > you describe sometimes work, but in general, this does not work. Yes, that's what I meant. However, one has to consider that the user linking against your library doesn't necessarily have a C++ compiler and runtime environment (think of a library implemented in C++ which provides a plain C API). How would you accommodate such a situation if not by linking the C++ lib against libstdc++.a or equivalent? Thanks, Ludovic. _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
