[xml] RE: xml digest, Vol 1 #619 - 4 msgs

[Eric Zurcher csiro au]

Hi, 

I agree that "LIBXML_PUBLIC" would be a much clearer and more descriptive
term than "LIBXML_DLL_IMPORT". 

As a Windows developer, I would vote for including this in all the
declarations, but I realize that others will probably disagree. Are there no
platforms other than Windows where it would be useful to mark "public"
functions and data in this way? 

> Reply-To: Igor Zlatkovic <igor stud fh-frankfurt de>
> From: Igor Zlatkovic <igor stud fh-frankfurt de>
> To: <xml gnome org>
> Subject: Re: [xml] Building libxml2 as a DLL under MinGW MSYS
> Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 19:49:01 +0200
> Organization: UAS Frankfurt
>
>
> One thing: The name 'LIBXML_DLL_EXPORT' is somewhat misleading. An user
who
> has never seen Windows rightfully asks herself what that should be. Should
> this thing ever be used more than now, I would urge to rename it to
> something more understandable, such as LIBXML_PUBLIC, for example.
>
> Whatever its name, putting it in front of every function's declaration is
> unlikely to happen. Only Windows can profit from this and all other
> platforms would have to endure a header uglification. We had discussed
about
> this a while ago. There is a hard resistance at least as long as there is
an
> alternative.
>
> > > Any objections, suggestions, cries, cheers?

Plenty of cheers. Libxml2 is quite an achievement.

> >
Eric Zurcher
CSIRO Livestock Industries
Canberra, Australia
Eric Zurcher csiro au