Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com Message-ID: <02b901c235b5$f9fdfcc0$6132bc3e@BABEL> From: "Conrad Scott" To: References: <028701c235ac$b1c303f0$6132bc3e AT BABEL> <20020727211653 DOT GA8923 AT redhat DOT com> Subject: Re: -fno-rtti Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 22:38:38 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 "Christopher Faylor" wrote: > The Cygwin DLL has always used "c++ lite". Part of the reason was that > g++ didn't work too well when cygwin was first conceived so things like > dynamic casts and exceptions were to be avoided. Part of the reason > was that the original developer was teaching himself c++ when he initially > wrote cygwin. > > My preference would be for you to avoid the use of this feature. 9k is > 9k. We already seem to grow and slow the dll with each release. I'd > rather not make a conscious decision to do this when it can be avoided. Fair enough: I'm a bit blase about code size, due in part to the environments I've worked in recently, but that doesn't mean big is beautiful. I noted your appreciation of that recent patch that removed both code and bug in one fell swoop but I seem to tend in the other direction (that's "more code", not "more bugs" -- I hope . . .) Would the alternative of compiling just the cygserver with rtti be acceptable? For the problem I've got (which is defining equality operators on a class hierarchy) rolling my own code would probably cost more in terms of space and time than the native C++ rtti. Oh! and a much more important reason: it would be irritating too :-) // Conrad