Hello Paul,
Thanks for the advice.
> Did you consider doing it the way glibc does it, with the
> attribute_hidden macro? Perhaps gnulib could use the same syntax as
> glibc, albeit with different semantics on other platforms. If that
> doesn't suffice, there's also the syntax suggested by Niall
Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I wish to export the symbols of external{i}.c without modifications,
> whereas the symbols of internal{j}.c should get a prefix.
Doesn't the question of whether a symbol should get a prefix more
properly belong to .h files than to .c files? That is, if
Ralf Wildenhues wrote on 2006-09-08:
> > > are you planning on providing a means to
> > > automatically rename gnulib functions to a library-specific namespace?
> > > As long as there is no policy on interface stability for gnulib, I would
> > > fear to see lots of libraries floating around that al
Hello Bruno,
* Bruno Haible wrote on Wed, Sep 06, 2006 at 07:00:31PM CEST:
>
> > Slightly related question: are you planning on providing a means to
> > automatically rename gnulib functions to a library-specific namespace?
> > As long as there is no policy on interface stability for gnulib, I wo
Hello Ralf,
> Slightly related question: are you planning on providing a means to
> automatically rename gnulib functions to a library-specific namespace?
> As long as there is no policy on interface stability for gnulib, I would
> fear to see lots of libraries floating around that all carry some
