Re: Bye-bye Ada ? (Ada95 Wholesale Changes?)

["Martin Krischik" <Martin.Krischik@T-Online.de>]

On Mon, 24 Feb 2003 12:00:30 +0000, Hyman Rosen wrote:

> Martin Krischik wrote:
>> I can't. In real live not the programer decides which compiler to use. He
>> may make a suggesting and run against a wall with it.
> 
> True. When I participate in this group, I'm more concerned with
> abstract language issues rather than strictly practical nuts and
> bolts. Still, your compilation system seems extremely out of date.
> Are you free to say what system it is you are using?

IBM C++. It is not only outdated but also out of support. But there are
large Libraries which depend on and so there is fear of change.
 
>> I am not shure about that one. Even if compiler and linker work in such
>> perfect harmony how will they enshure that over DLL borders?
 
> Well, DLLs can have all sorts of symbol information. There is no
> reason that a dynamic linker can't do exactly the same kind of
> merging that a static linker does.

DLL Loaders are usualy supplied from the Operating System and they are
usualy not Object-Orientated.

The IBM Compiler will only create one virtual function table and export it
from the DLL for other DLLs to use. I determines which DLL does the
exporting by the first virtual function encoutered. Woe you is that one is
inlined.  

Thats of course only until you use virtual inheritance - after that the compiler
starts to create virtual function tables left, right and centre.

With regards.

Martin

-- 
Martin Krischik
mailto://Martin@krischik.com
http://www.martin.krischik.com