[openbeos] Re: PPC versions

  • From: "Kaya Memisoglu" <k.memisoglu@xxxxxxxx>
  • To: <openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 19:07:31 +0200

> a) i also see the difference _export imposes on dynamic libraries vs.
static libraries:
> a dll build of a given library would either export a different set of
symbols or would
> not
> allow a static library build at all. and that most deffinitely is an
effect _not_ sought
> for,
> as i want to be able to build dynamic or static _identical_ libraries on
the expence of
> a single cc setting change.
Oh yes, you are right... I remember a software project, where we wanted to
a DLL (Windows) after we had a static library. It was like hell! Remembering
time, I really agree, that _EXPORT is something stupid, because it produces
different results for static and dynamic libraries...

> b) the very semantics of the c/c++ language encourages high level of
> visibility (AAMOF anything not explicitly 'hidden' is exported), and for
good or for bad
> the language does not distinguish between 'source/obj' modules, 'static
library' modules
> and 'dynamic library' modules. a good c/++ compiler should comply to the
language specs.
> even despite the drawback of c++ not having any means for making a class
hidden within
> its source file!
There is one possibility: C++ allows nested classes. I often used a private
class within
another class. And this private class definately is only visible within the

> IMO, too, _export is a good thing -- in the context of obos, as it allows
ppc builds.
Although now I see that _export is somewhat stupid regarding its behaviour
to static libs, I surely agree here.


Other related posts: