[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Win32 libltdl issue
From: |
Ralf Wildenhues |
Subject: |
Re: Win32 libltdl issue |
Date: |
Thu, 28 Apr 2005 07:49:21 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.4.1i |
Hi Bob, Howard, others,
* Bob Friesenhahn wrote on Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 06:34:47PM CEST:
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Howard Chu wrote:
> >>
> >>Related question: Do I have to specify the declspec(export) in the same
> >>translation unit in which I define the function? This is what bugs us
> >>in mingw ATM. Specifying the declspec in another translation unit
> >>seems to work with cygwin but fail on mingw. (Of course, the unit gets
> >>linked into the same lib in any case).
> >
> >Yes, I think so, but not entirely sure. Since all the code I work with
> >always puts the declarations in a header file that every source file
> >includes, it has never been an issue for me.
>
> The declarations should be consistently applied across all translation
> units in the same DLL. If a function prototype is supplied, then it
> should be appropriately scoped during compilation.
Well, just to satisfy this rule we would need to break binary
compatibility on win32, since the *_preloaded_symbols lists created on
the fly in `libtool' might need them. As far as I understand, it would
be much easier though to do the right thing[tm] and replace them with
accessor functions right away.
This has the additional small benefit that we only need break once -- we
could do the accessor functions for object and functions symbols
correctly right away (TODO 1.2, first entry).
> >I see that more recent versions of cygwin/mingw appear to have made using
> >declspec unnecessary:
> This assumes that libtool should only support the GCC compiler under
> Windows. Microsoft, Borland, and others, need not apply. Is there a
> good reason to rule out all compilers except for GCC?
I agree with Bob. Unless there is compelling reason against keeping
support in, we should. Obviously, there is no reason against optimizing
the case where we have a good linker either.
BTW: Does anyone have access to non-gcc compilers on win32 and some
incentive to test Libtool HEAD with them? We need more test coverage
there (and probably a couple of patches, too).
Regards,
Ralf
- Win32 libltdl issue, (continued)
- Win32 libltdl issue, Howard Chu, 2005/04/26
- Re: Win32 libltdl issue, Ralf Wildenhues, 2005/04/27
- Re: Win32 libltdl issue, Howard Chu, 2005/04/27
- Re: Win32 libltdl issue, Ralf Wildenhues, 2005/04/27
- Re: Win32 libltdl issue, Howard Chu, 2005/04/27
- Re: Win32 libltdl issue, Bob Friesenhahn, 2005/04/27
- Re: Win32 libltdl issue, Howard Chu, 2005/04/27
- Re: Win32 libltdl issue, Charles Wilson, 2005/04/27
- Re: Win32 libltdl issue, Howard Chu, 2005/04/27
- Re: Win32 libltdl issue, Charles Wilson, 2005/04/28
- Re: Win32 libltdl issue,
Ralf Wildenhues <=
- Re: Win32 libltdl issue, Bob Friesenhahn, 2005/04/28
- Re: Win32 libltdl issue, Ralf Wildenhues, 2005/04/28