Re: libpq's pollution of application namespace
От | William ZHANG |
---|---|
Тема | Re: libpq's pollution of application namespace |
Дата | |
Msg-id | dj7r1m$2mkp$1@news.hub.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | libpq's pollution of application namespace (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: libpq's pollution of application namespace
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
I think it is a good idea to make the exported symbols clearer. We should only export the symbols needed. The output of "dlltool --export-all" is too big. AFAIK, we can generate *.def for Win32/MSVC++ from a text file like this. PQclear PQfn FooGlobalData DATA "Neil Conway" <neilc@samurai.com> wrote > On Mon, 2005-17-10 at 13:32 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> I dislike portability approaches that try to enumerate supported cases, >> rather than being general in the first place. > > Do we need to have this on every platform we support? The symbols we > want to hide are internal by convention anyway -- using a linker script > or similar technique just improves upon this by preventing applications > from misbehaving (and it also improves performance slightly). If no one > has bothered to add support for a particular platform's linker they > won't get these benefits, but that doesn't seem like a disaster. > > -Neil > > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate > subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly >
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: