Re: [xml] RE: xml digest, Vol 1 #619 - 4 msgs
- From: Robert Collins <robert collins syncretize net>
- To: Igor Zlatkovic <igor stud fh-frankfurt de>
- Cc: Eric Zurcher csiro au, xml gnome org
- Subject: Re: [xml] RE: xml digest, Vol 1 #619 - 4 msgs
- Date: 30 Sep 2002 21:07:12 +1000
On Mon, 2002-09-30 at 21:03, Igor Zlatkovic wrote:
Ho, where do you get those subjects?
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
platforms other than Windows where it would be useful to mark "public"
functions and data in this way?
Other platforms with this mess? I doubt it. At least libxml source defines
this macro only on Windows.
IIRC AIX Also uses .dll's and has the same export issue. I am likely
wrong though - YMMV.
] [Thread Prev