Summary:
Patch from a series of patches to rename EAPI symbols to specific
library DSOs.
= The Rationale =
This patch is from a series of patches to rename EAPI symbols to
specific library DSOs.
EAPI was designed to be able to pass
`__attribute__ ((visibility ("default")))` for symbols with
GCC, which would mean that even if -fvisibility=hidden was used
when compiling the library, the needed symbols would get exported.
MSVC __almost__ works like GCC (or mingw) in which you can
declare everything as export and it will just work (slower, but
it will work). But there's a caveat: global variables will not
work the same way for MSVC, but works for mingw and GCC.
For global variables (as opposed to functions), MSVC requires
correct DSO visibility for MSVC: instead of declaring a symbol as
export for everything, you need to declare it as import when
importing from another DSO and export when defining it locally.
With current EAPI definitions, we get the following example
working in mingw and MSVC (observe it doesn't define any global
variables as exported symbols).
Example 1:
dll1:
```
EAPI void foo(void);
EAPI void bar()
{
foo();
}
```
dll2:
```
EAPI void foo()
{
printf ("foo\n");
}
```
This works fine with API defined as __declspec(dllexport) in both
cases and for gcc defining as
`__atttribute__((visibility("default")))`.
However, the following:
Example 2:
dll1:
```
EAPI extern int foo;
EAPI void foobar(void);
EAPI void bar()
{
foo = 5;
foobar();
}
```
dll2:
```
EAPI int foo = 0;
EAPI void foobar()
{
printf ("foo %d\n", foo);
}
```
This will work on mingw but will not work for MSVC. And that's why
LIBAPI is the only solution that works for MSVC.
Co-authored-by: João Paulo Taylor Ienczak Zanette <jpaulotiz@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Lucas Cavalcante de Sousa <lucks.sousa@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Ricardo Campos <ricardo.campos@expertise.dev>
Reviewers: jptiz, lucas, vtorri, woohyun
Reviewed By: jptiz, lucas, vtorri
Subscribers: cedric, #reviewers, #committers
Tags: #efl
Differential Revision: https://phab.enlightenment.org/D12203
as stated in f92e5d50, instead of using eo_add_custom() thus a custom
constructor and maybe overriding the default constructor to block it,
- use the default constructor to build the object
- add calls to eo_add(), to initialize the object
eo_add(class, parent, val_a_set(1), val_b_set(2), ... );
- override eo_finalize to validate the object and if needed,
use eo_error_set(obj) to abort object construction
This reverts commit 1714fe93f4.
We actually want this type, it makes things clearer.
Conflicts:
src/tests/eo/function_overrides/function_overrides_inherit2.c
src/tests/eo/function_overrides/function_overrides_simple.c
src/tests/eo/suite/eo_test_class_simple.c
Felipe Magno de Almeida
Tom Hacohen
Jérémy Zurcher
Vincent Torri