1 files changed, 144 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/FAQ.md b/FAQ.md
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..af721307c2ec
--- /dev/null
+++ b/FAQ.md
@@ -0,0 +1,144 @@
+# Abseil FAQ
+
+## Is Abseil the right home for my utility library?
+
+Most often the answer to the question is "no." As both the [About
+Abseil](https://abseil.io/about/) page and our [contributing
+guidelines](https://github.com/abseil/abseil-cpp/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#contribution-guidelines)
+explain, Abseil contains a variety of core C++ library code that is widely used
+at [Google](https://www.google.com/). As such, Abseil's primary purpose is to be
+used as a dependency by Google's open source C++ projects. While we do hope that
+Abseil is also useful to the C++ community at large, this added constraint also
+means that we are unlikely to accept a contribution of utility code that isn't
+already widely used by Google.
+
+## How to I set the C++ dialect used to build Abseil?
+
+The short answer is that whatever mechanism you choose, you need to make sure
+that you set this option consistently at the global level for your entire
+project. If, for example, you want to set the C++ dialect to C++17, with
+[Bazel](https://bazel/build/) as the build system and `gcc` or `clang` as the
+compiler, there several ways to do this:
+* Pass `--cxxopt=-std=c++17` on the command line (for example, `bazel build
+  --cxxopt=-std=c++17 ...`)
+* Set the environment variable `BAZEL_CXXOPTS` (for example,
+  `BAZEL_CXXOPTS=-std=c++17`)
+* Add `build --cxxopt=-std=c++17` to your [`.bazelrc`
+  file](https://docs.bazel.build/versions/master/guide.html#bazelrc)
+
+If you are using CMake as the build system, you'll need to add a line like
+`set(CMAKE_CXX_STANDARD 17)` to your top level `CMakeLists.txt` file. See the
+[CMake build
+instructions](https://github.com/abseil/abseil-cpp/blob/master/CMake/README.md)
+for more information.
+
+For a longer answer to this question and to understand why some other approaches
+don't work, see the answer to "What is ABI and why don't you recommend using a
+pre-compiled version of Abseil?"
+
+## What is ABI and why don't you recommend using a pre-compiled version of Abseil?
+
+For the purposes of this discussion, you can think of
+[ABI](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Application_binary_interface) as the
+compiled representation of the interfaces in code. This is in contrast to
+[API](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Application_programming_interface), which
+you can think of as the interfaces as defined by the code itself. [Abseil has a
+strong promise of API compatibility, but does not make any promise of ABI
+compatibility](https://abseil.io/about/compatibility). Let's take a look at what
+this means in practice.
+
+You might be tempted to do something like this in a
+[Bazel](https://bazel.build/) `BUILD` file:
+
+```
+# DON'T DO THIS!!!
+cc_library(
+    name = "my_library",
+    srcs = ["my_library.cc"],
+    copts = ["-std=c++17"],  # May create a mixed-mode compile!
+    deps = ["@com_google_absl//absl/strings"],
+)
+```
+
+Applying `-std=c++17` to an individual target in your `BUILD` file is going to
+compile that specific target in C++17 mode, but it isn't going to ensure the
+Abseil library is built in C++17 mode, since the Abseil library itself is a
+different build target. If your code includes an Abseil header, then your
+program may contain conflicting definitions of the same
+class/function/variable/enum, etc. As a rule, all compile options that affect
+the ABI of a program need to be applied to the entire build on a global basis.
+
+C++ has something called the [One Definition
+Rule](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Definition_Rule) (ODR). C++ doesn't
+allow multiple definitions of the same class/function/variable/enum, etc. ODR
+violations sometimes result in linker errors, but linkers do not always catch
+violations. Uncaught ODR violations can result in strange runtime behaviors or
+crashes that can be hard to debug.
+
+If you build the Abseil library and your code using different compile options
+that affect ABI, there is a good chance you will run afoul of the One Definition
+Rule. Examples of GCC compile options that affect ABI include (but aren't
+limited to) language dialect (e.g. `-std=`), optimization level (e.g. `-O2`),
+code generation flags (e.g. `-fexceptions`), and preprocessor defines
+(e.g. `-DNDEBUG`).
+
+If you use a pre-compiled version of Abseil, (for example, from your Linux
+distribution package manager or from something like
+[vcpkg](https://github.com/microsoft/vcpkg)) you have to be very careful to
+ensure ABI compatibility across the components of your program. The only way you
+can be sure your program is going to be correct regarding ABI is to ensure
+you've used the exact same compile options as were used to build the
+pre-compiled library. This does not mean that Abseil cannot work as part of a
+Linux distribution since a knowledgeable binary packager will have ensured that
+all packages have been built with consistent compile options. This is one of the
+reasons we warn against - though do not outright reject - using Abseil as a
+pre-compiled library.
+
+Another possible way that you might afoul of ABI issues is if you accidentally
+include two versions of Abseil in your program. Multiple versions of Abseil can
+end up within the same binary if your program uses the Abseil library and
+another library also transitively depends on Abseil (resulting in what is
+sometimes called the diamond dependency problem). In cases such as this you must
+structure your build so that all libraries use the same version of Abseil.
+[Abseil's strong promise of API compatibility between
+releases](https://abseil.io/about/compatibility) means the latest "HEAD" release
+of Abseil is almost certainly the right choice if you are doing as we recommend
+and building all of your code from source.
+
+For these reasons we recommend you avoid pre-compiled code and build the Abseil
+library yourself in a consistent manner with the rest of your code.
+
+## What is "live at head" and how do I do it?
+
+From Abseil's point-of-view, "live at head" means that every Abseil source
+release (which happens on an almost daily basis) is either API compatible with
+the previous release, or comes with an automated tool that you can run over code
+to make it compatible. In practice, the need to use an automated tool is
+extremely rare. This means that upgrading from one source release to another
+should be a routine practice that can and should be performed often.
+
+We recommend you update to the latest release of Abseil as often as
+possible. Not only will you pick up bug fixes more quickly, but if you have good
+automated testing, you will catch and be able to fix any [Hyrum's
+Law](https://www.hyrumslaw.com/) dependency problems on an incremental basis
+instead of being overwhelmed by them and having difficulty isolating them if you
+wait longer between updates.
+
+If you are using the [Bazel](https://bazel.build/) build system and its
+[external dependencies](https://docs.bazel.build/versions/master/external.html)
+feature, updating the
+[`http_archive`](https://docs.bazel.build/versions/master/repo/http.html#http_archive)
+rule in your
+[`WORKSPACE`](https://docs.bazel.build/versions/master/be/workspace.html) for
+`com_google_abseil` to point to the latest release is all you need to do. You
+can commit the updated `WORKSPACE` file to your source control every time you
+update, and if you have good automated testing, you might even consider
+automating this.
+
+One thing we don't recommend is using GitHub's `master.zip` files (for example
+[https://github.com/abseil/abseil-cpp/archive/master.zip](https://github.com/abseil/abseil-cpp/archive/master.zip)),
+which are always the latest commit in the `master` branch, to implement live at
+head. Since these `master.zip` URLs are not versioned, you will lose build
+reproducibility. In addition, some build systems, including Bazel, will simply
+cache this file, which means you won't actually be updating to the latest
+release until your cache is cleared or invalidated.