[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Patchless modification of Lua source code
- From: Philipp Janda <siffiejoe@...>
- Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2018 05:11:34 +0100
Am 24.11.18 um 03:19 schröbte Sean Conner:
No answer to my question though?
I'm not sure which question you mean, so I'll try to answer all
questions I can find in your last message.
I ask, what does "not defined in the
current translation" mean to you?
Probably the same as you, with the exception that I think "current
translation" refers to a single translation unit as in the descriptions
of the other translation phases.
But then we do agree on the fact that unresolved external symbols may be
looked up in a library. What we don't agree on is what is supposed to
happen if a library contains an external symbol that already is defined
somewhere else (either in a standalone translation unit or in a library).
So, how do I interpret these results?
You answered this one yourself.
So did I use two non-comformant compilers for this experiment
Your compilers are probably fine. As soon as undefined behavior is
involved (which I claim is the case if you link multiple external
definitions), a compiler can do almost anything, and that includes
ignoring some symbols from libraries if there are definitions for those
symbols in other translation units.