Hi, On 18.02.2018 21:06, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
in recent release, GiNaC::matrix::inverse() const was inlined, which changes the ABI, and there were some other backwards-incompatible changes. See the abi diff report [1], and the bug report where this was discussed [2]. Was this intentional?
Thanks for reporting a bug. What was intentional is this: To add a new signature matrix::inverse(unsigned) const (1) while retaining the existing matrix::inverse() const (2) as a mere special case of (1), cf. https://www.ginac.de/ginac.git/?p=ginac.git;a=commit;h=1be7026a705dfefedcd83... Why does the compiler not add a (weak) symbol of (2) even though it's declared inline (implicitly)? What's the proper way to handle this common situation? -richy.