Patch 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
EAPI is the only solution that worked for MSVC.
Co-authored-by: João Paulo Taylor Ienczak Zanette <jpaulotiz@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Ricardo Campos <ricardo.campos@expertise.dev>
Co-authored-by: Lucas Cavalcante de Sousa <lucks.sousa@gmail.com>
this takes the current generated output from eolian for legacy code in
efl and adds it to the tree, then removes legacy references from the
corresponding eo files. in the case where the entire eo file was for
a legacy object, that eo file has been removed from the tree
ref T7724
Reviewed-by: Cedric BAIL <cedric.bail@free.fr>
Differential Revision: https://phab.enlightenment.org/D8159
this currently has no counterpart in interface widgets but would be
useful there. removing the use of an elm_scroller type makes it independent
of legacy widgets, and it's still a beta api so at least future development
can be resumed at some point without much issue
Reviewed-by: Cedric BAIL <cedric.bail@free.fr>
Differential Revision: https://phab.enlightenment.org/D8158
Summary:
Instead of including the legacy header on the main header, just include
it where it is actually used (diff_widget.c), like in elm_code_widget.c.
Test Plan: Try to compile edi with the tarball from `make dist`. It should not fail with elm_code related errors.
Reviewers: raster, stefan_schmidt, felipealmeida
Subscribers: cedric
Differential Revision: https://phab.enlightenment.org/D5807
Signed-off-by: Cedric Bail <cedric@osg.samsung.com>
Summary:
For now, how to check whether a widget is legacy or not
is to check flags in private data or static flag, which is set
during elm_legacy_add.
If Efl.Ui.Legacy interface is added, it can be easilly checked
by efl_isa(obj, EFL_UI_LEGACY_INTERFACE)
Reviewers: woohyun, jpeg, cedric, Jaehyun_Cho
Subscribers: conr2d, cedric, jpeg
Differential Revision: https://phab.enlightenment.org/D5748
It has been discussed on the ML (thread: "[RFC] rename efl_self") and
IRC, and has been decided we should rename it to this in order to avoid
confusion with the already established meaning of self which is very
similar to what we were using it for, but didn't have complete overlap.
Kudos to Marcel Hollerbach for initiating the discussion and
fighting for it until he convinced a significant mass. :)
This commit breaks API, and depending on compiler potentially ABI.
@feature