On Fri, 2014-02-28 at 22:15 +0100, Marc Glisse wrote:
> > So then I tried to use inline versions of global new/delete. If I
> > further add __attribute__((force_inline)) then it APPEARS to do what I'd
> > like: none of my objects are exporting global new/delete.
>
> Header <new> contains:
> #pragma GCC visibility push(default)
> __attribute__((__externally_visible__));
>
> It seems hard to counter those effects.
Ah. Hrm...
> > Is there a better supported, more "approved" way to handle this
> > requirement?
>
> I haven't looked at it closely, but maybe asking the linker directly
> (instead of telling gcc to tell the linker), for instance through a
> map file, could help?
That's possible. I'll give it a try to see...
Yes, that works: I can convert those symbols from "T" to "t" with a
version-script.
Hmm...
>
> The simplest is probably to use asm("other_name_for_new") on a
> declaration of new, so it is still visible but with a different
> name...
But isn't this subject to the same caveats that using force_inline is?
If I don't include the header file, then the code silently falls back to
the system new/delete.
