C++ module ordering (was: segmentation fault on GiNaC-1.2.0 using MinGW on Win XP)

[Richard B. Kreckel]

On 6 May 2004, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> > Please see <http://www.ginac.de/lists/ginac-devel/msg00623.html>.
>
> Those bits are the end of my message weren't actually written by me.
> They were written by some of the C++ compiler hackers at Cygnus.

So it remains a mystery what was meant by "full runtime dependency
analysis [...] with no linker mods"?  Sad.

> Are you familiar with the init_priority attribute supported by g++?
> It seems to me that it handles most of the problems associated with
> static object initialization order.
>     http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.4.0/gcc/C---Attributes.html#C++%20Attributes

Sure, but that is only pampering about the real problem: Who establishes
the PRIORITY variables?  The programmer would have to do it manually.
Any programmer is likely to get it wrong if confronted with several
hundreds or even thousands of modules.  Working with an automated
mechanism is much less prone to errors.  Hence init_priority is not at all
an acceptable solution, IMNSHO.

A while ago, I've been debugging an industrial application where the
linker line was basically rearranged automatically based on a self-made
scheme: a script was extracting dependency ordering information scattered
by the programmer.  That solution is equivalant to GCC's init_priority.
The lesson learned from that experience are:

1) Most professional C++ programmers are not aware of there being a
   problem.  Really.  :-(

2) Even if they are, they are unlikely to get it right.  #-(

3) If they don't get it right, debugging code which hasn't even started
   running yet is intersting.  :-/

Best wishes
        -richy.
-- 
Richard B. Kreckel
<http://www.ginac.de/~kreckel/>