answers.launchpad.net/gcc-arm-embedded/+question/267037

Preview meta tags from the answers.launchpad.net website.

Linked Hostnames

16

Thumbnail

Search Engine Appearance

Google

https://answers.launchpad.net/gcc-arm-embedded/+question/267037

Question #267037 “Why doesn't nano provide a slimmer __cxa_pure_...” : Questions : GNU Arm Embedded Toolchain

I wrote a tiny demo program that deliberately pulls in __cxa_pure_virtual. If I replace the "= 0;" of the single pure virtual method in this demo with "{ }" then the size of the .text section (as reported by "size -A") drops really dramatically. I'm definitely using nano - if I remove "--specs=nano.specs" from my linker arguments then I see a noticeable size increase. Why doesn't nano provide a slimmer __cxa_pure_virtual by default? At the moment I have to add the following to every progr...



Bing

Question #267037 “Why doesn't nano provide a slimmer __cxa_pure_...” : Questions : GNU Arm Embedded Toolchain

https://answers.launchpad.net/gcc-arm-embedded/+question/267037

I wrote a tiny demo program that deliberately pulls in __cxa_pure_virtual. If I replace the "= 0;" of the single pure virtual method in this demo with "{ }" then the size of the .text section (as reported by "size -A") drops really dramatically. I'm definitely using nano - if I remove "--specs=nano.specs" from my linker arguments then I see a noticeable size increase. Why doesn't nano provide a slimmer __cxa_pure_virtual by default? At the moment I have to add the following to every progr...



DuckDuckGo

https://answers.launchpad.net/gcc-arm-embedded/+question/267037

Question #267037 “Why doesn't nano provide a slimmer __cxa_pure_...” : Questions : GNU Arm Embedded Toolchain

I wrote a tiny demo program that deliberately pulls in __cxa_pure_virtual. If I replace the "= 0;" of the single pure virtual method in this demo with "{ }" then the size of the .text section (as reported by "size -A") drops really dramatically. I'm definitely using nano - if I remove "--specs=nano.specs" from my linker arguments then I see a noticeable size increase. Why doesn't nano provide a slimmer __cxa_pure_virtual by default? At the moment I have to add the following to every progr...

  • General Meta Tags

    6
    • title
      Question #267037 “Why doesn't nano provide a slimmer __cxa_pure_...” : Questions : GNU Arm Embedded Toolchain
    • charset
      UTF-8
    • msapplication-TileColor
      #da532c
    • msapplication-config
      /@@/browserconfig.xml?v=2022
    • theme-color
      #ffffff

  • Open Graph Meta Tags

    6
    • og:description
      I wrote a tiny demo program that deliberately pulls in __cxa_pure_virtual. If I replace the "= 0;" of the single pure virtual method in this demo with "{ }" then the size of the .text section (as reported by "size -A") drops really dramatically. I'm definitely using nano - if I remove "--specs=nano.specs" from my linker arguments then I see a noticeable size increase. Why doesn't nano provide a slimmer __cxa_pure_virtual by default? At the moment I have to add the following to every progr...
    • og:title
      Question #267037 “Why doesn't nano provide a slimmer __cxa_pure_...” : Questions : GNU Arm Embedded Toolchain
    • og:type
      website
    • og:image
      /@@/launchpad-og-image.png
    • og:url
      https://answers.launchpad.net/gcc-arm-embedded/+question/267037/+index

  • Link Tags

    7
    • apple-touch-icon
      /@@/apple-touch-icon.png?v=2022
    • icon
      /@@/favicon-32x32.png?v=2022
    • icon
      /@@/favicon-16x16.png?v=2022
    • manifest
      /@@/site.webmanifest?v=2022
    • mask-icon
      /@@/safari-pinned-tab.svg?v=2022

Links

33