> [ cc'ing awt-dev@ ]
>
> Probably gcc can't process typedefs with visibility attributes specified,
> hence the changes to AWT. Generally they look good.
It's not necessary for those typedefs as those types are not being used to
define exported functions. The way it was being used in awt_LoadL
> I did find at least a couple places in JavaFX 8.0 where it's being misused.
> Those should be easy to clean up though, I can file an issue and handle it. I
> haven't checked JavaFX 2.x yet, but that's not a concern until this gets
> backported.
On closer look JavaFX 8 is fine. My noisy grep
>> I totally agree that the current usage of JNIEXPORT in typedefs in AWT and
>> 2D code is a bug.
>>
>> My concern, however, is about other code that mistakenly adapted the same
>> pattern. After this fix its compilation will fail.
>>
> Yup. Any code that was using JNIEXPORT inappropriately
Lana was kind enough to jprt this change for me. Now submitted to tl.
One more point - IIRC, the issue with JNIEXPORT being used in typedefs only
generated a GCC warning, not an error, and so everything will continue to
compile unless they use -Werror.
All right then. I'm fine with the fix.
--
best regards,
Anthony
On 4/12/2013 19:22, David DeHaven wrote:
I totally agree that the current usage of JNIEXPORT in typedefs in AWT and 2D
code is a bug.
My concern, however, is about other code that mistakenly adapted the same
pattern. After this
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 1:45 AM, Anthony Petrov
wrote:
> I totally agree that the current usage of JNIEXPORT in typedefs in AWT and
> 2D code is a bug.
>
> My concern, however, is about other code that mistakenly adapted the same
> pattern. After this fix its compilation will fail.
>
Yup. Any co
I totally agree that the current usage of JNIEXPORT in typedefs in AWT
and 2D code is a bug.
My concern, however, is about other code that mistakenly adapted the
same pattern. After this fix its compilation will fail.
--
best regards,
Anthony
On 4/9/2013 19:39, David DeHaven wrote:
[ cc'ing
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 8:39 AM, David DeHaven wrote:
>
> > [ cc'ing awt-dev@ ]
> >
> > Probably gcc can't process typedefs with visibility attributes
> specified, hence the changes to AWT. Generally they look good.
>
> It's not necessary for those typedefs as those types are not being used to
> de
Hi Coleen, Martin,
[ cc'ing awt-dev@ ]
Probably gcc can't process typedefs with visibility attributes
specified, hence the changes to AWT. Generally they look good.
However, I'm concerned with the compatibility impact of this change. I
suppose that 3rd-party JNI libraries could use such a pa
10 matches
Mail list logo
