Re: libpq's pollution of application namespace - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From William ZHANG
Subject Re: libpq's pollution of application namespace
Date
Msg-id dj7r1m$2mkp$1@news.hub.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to libpq's pollution of application namespace  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: libpq's pollution of application namespace
List 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
> 




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Martijn van Oosterhout
Date:
Subject: Re: multi-relation indices
Next
From: Martijn van Oosterhout
Date:
Subject: Re: libpq's pollution of application namespace