Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
I don't have the email anymore but I'm pretty sure that blargg had mentioned
the same
point to me several months ago. There is already visibility support for recent
compilers so it's just a matter of only exporting required symbols (and testing
to
make sure it's not too restrictive).
Original comment by michael....@gmail.com
on 8 Feb 2010 at 3:40
Correction, by "There is visibility support" I mean that my local system's
checkout
has visibility support that I've never committed. :(
I think I was discussing it with blargg so I need to see if I can get in touch
with
him again first.
Original comment by michael....@gmail.com
on 8 Feb 2010 at 4:04
Yes, the lack of namespaces is an issue. My main reason for holding off was
allowing
compatibility with older compilers, as some people still use Visual C++ 6 or
something crazy like that. My future direction for libraries is to have a C
wrapper
(e.g. gme.h), and consider the C++ interface internal.
We should be adding exporting within several days, so at least when building a
shared
library, only the gme.h functions will be exported.
Original comment by gbla...@gmail.com
on 8 Feb 2010 at 2:18
The next big version will optionally put everything into namespace blargg. It
will
also be able to put everything into a namespace of another name. This is to
solve the
issue of using two of my libraries compiled statically into a program. The
problem
that otherwise arises is that the common facilities (blargg_vector, Data_Reader,
etc.) would conflict, due to each library defining its own version, and worse,
each
library possibly defining them differently. Having to keep my common utilities
interface-stable across all my libraries would be a real chore.
Original comment by gbla...@gmail.com
on 13 Feb 2010 at 10:44
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
slomosn...@gmail.com
on 14 Aug 2009 at 8:38