Re: __register_frame_info & shared library compatibility

[Jamie Lokier <egcs@tantalophile.demon.co.uk>]

Jeffrey A Law wrote:
> We already know at some point we will have to break binary compatibility in
> the future to get some new C++ features.  That would be the time to drop the
> old interfaces.

If you're prepared to break the C shared libraries at the same time,
your proposal sounds perfect.

>   > Though frankly, the bloat due to the redundant .eh_frame in C binaries
>   > much more significant.  Is throwing an exception through C really
>   > supposed to have defined behaviour?
> ?!?  I don't think we create eh_frames for C code by default now.  We do
> if one specifies -fexceptions though.

Sorry, you're right.  I have seen big ones before, and I just checked
.eh_frame and found a small one on a recent C binary.  Even a trivial
program has a tiny .eh_frame of 4 bytes.

-- Jamie