[K42-discussion] Cause of cxa_atexit/dso_handle reference

[Patrick G. Bridges]

On Aug 23, 2006, at 1:52 PM, Bryan S Rosenburg wrote:

>
> I'm sorry for not being more responsive.  As Orran said, we're  
> really busy working toward an internal milestone for the next few  
> weeks.
>
> I'm still in favor of avoiding global objects on general  
> principles, but not if it involves solving too many case-by-case  
> problems.  I think the particular DeletedObject case can be solved  
> with a dynamic allocation using the "primitive" memory allocator.   
> I've attached a patch below.  The patch compiles, but I haven't  
> tested it, and I certainly haven't verified that it avoids the  
> cxa_atexit requirement.
>
> If there are too many cases, or if there are cases that can't be  
> easily resolved, I'd fall back on providing a cxa_atexit() that  
> doesn't do anything.  There's really no point in recording the  
> cleanup functions when there's no code that will ever call them.

Well, we'll need a version for k42 libc anyway that works, since we  
*will* want to support global objects there, right?