[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ft-devel] LD version script
From: |
Alexei Podtelezhnikov |
Subject: |
Re: [ft-devel] LD version script |
Date: |
Thu, 1 Feb 2018 08:48:38 -0500 |
>> In particular: "Furthermore, using linker version scripts doesn't
>> permit GCC to better optimise the code."
>
> I think this is a misunderstanding – as mentioned earlier, Drepper
> suggests to use *both* (i.e., a C attribute in the source code *and* a
> linker version script for symbol versioning). The word `permit'
> doesn't mean that a linker version script prevents code optimization
> by the compiler.
My reading was that it could be bad for some C++, but not C. Again,
the symbol versioning does not improve performance, the attribute
does. I am attaching my slightly updated script. We need to discuss
the tag, FREETYPE or FT or FreeType if it is legal.
I will work on -fvisibility=hidden support through AC_TRY_COMPILE.
symvergen
Description: Binary data
- Re: [ft-devel] LD version script, Werner LEMBERG, 2018/02/01
- Re: [ft-devel] LD version script,
Alexei Podtelezhnikov <=
- Re: [ft-devel] LD version script, Werner LEMBERG, 2018/02/02
- Re: [ft-devel] LD version script, Tom Kacvinsky, 2018/02/02
- Re: [ft-devel] LD version script, Werner LEMBERG, 2018/02/03
- Re: [ft-devel] LD version script, Tom Kacvinsky, 2018/02/03
- Re: [ft-devel] LD version script, Werner LEMBERG, 2018/02/03
- Re: [ft-devel] LD version script, Tom Kacvinsky, 2018/02/03
- Re: [ft-devel] LD version script, Tom Kacvinsky, 2018/02/03
- Re: [ft-devel] LD version script, Werner LEMBERG, 2018/02/06
- Re: [ft-devel] LD version script, Alexei Podtelezhnikov, 2018/02/02