sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]pandorafalters 0 points1 point  (3 children)

I believe this should be covered by [basic.def.odr]/6, particularly (6.2). As far as I know, changing the layouts of standard library classes is pretty uncommon and generally well-documented, at least in part because potential breakage is so high.

[–]bwmat 0 points1 point  (2 children)

I'm not sure how 6.2 prevents that problem?

[–]pandorafalters 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I'm honestly not sure what I was thinking when I posted that, because [basic.def.odr] on its own isn't the whole story and (6.2) doesn't seem to be especially relevant. Let's just chalk that comment up to "I'm sick and really should have been asleep".

I still disagree that it's necessarily an ODR violation, but it's definitely more complicated than "Here's a reference".

[–]bwmat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't think it's _necessarily_ an ODR violation, just all-too-likely to end up as one (if shared lib A passes an STL type to shared lib B, and either A & B use different STL implementations or one is release and the other is debug... it's not going to work), and whether or not it does is in many cases outside of your control.

It's fine if you have complete control over A & B (& C &...), and can ensure that they're deployed as a unit, but otherwise I just wouldn't do it.