Ethereal-dev: Re: RE : [Ethereal-dev] enabling libethereal.dll with MSVC (update)
Yes but I think it a lot easier to create, maintain and review a def
file with 478 lines (maainly copy'n'pasting) than finding and changing
487 defintions distributed throughout the code. :)
It might be problematic to use __declspec(dllexport) as long as we still
allow this code to be linked statically into ethereal depending just on
an option in config.nmake. You will probably need some additional
preprocessor directives and macros.
I do not want to complicate the first step towards a stable and tested
libethereal.dll. Can my patches checked in so it gets tested?
The option in config.nmake to build ethereal with a libethereal.dll is
off by default so it should not break anyone's build.
However, we might think about replacing the def file for wiretap first,
to see if this is possible.
RABRET Laurent FTRD/DAC/ISS wrote:
Yes and "def" file usage is no longer recommended (since a few years).
Using __declspec(dllimport) and __declspec(dllexport) also slightly
improve code efficiency (suppress one indirection). You must note it is
possible to add export functions in the dll without rebuilding the
executable.
Regards
Laurent
-----Original Message-----
From: ethereal-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ethereal-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Guy Harris
Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 11:02 AM
To: Ethereal development
Subject: Re: [Ethereal-dev] enabling libethereal.dll with MSVC (update)
Speaking of __declspec(), would using __declspec(dllexport) allow us to
get rid of libethereal.def?
_______________________________________________
Ethereal-dev mailing list
Ethereal-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.ethereal.com/mailman/listinfo/ethereal-dev
_______________________________________________
Ethereal-dev mailing list
Ethereal-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.ethereal.com/mailman/listinfo/ethereal-dev
