On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 10:57:29AM +0100, Andreas wrote:
[...]
> The problem I see is that Wireshark doesn't have "The API". It is not
> obvious which header files, and which declaration are public. When you
> look at the libwireshark.def it seems that definitions have been added
> or removed just as the needs appeared.
[...]
Yes, that is probably the most fundamental issue.
> I would propose to _define_ the Wireshark API. This will be a process
> and I don't expect this to become available in a few days. One way to
> identify *the Wireshark API* would be to identify this API in the header
> files.
>
> With a central macro WIRESHARKAPI(or WSAPI
This is a much better approach than my original idea of autogenerating the
.def file.
> // config.h
>
> #ifdef MSVC_VARIANT
> // generating libwireshark.DLL
> #ifdef _NEED_VAR_IMPORT
> #define WIRESHARKAPI __declspec(dllimport)
> #else
> #define WIRESHARKAPI __declspec(dllexport)
> #endif
> #else
> // not generating DLL
> #define WIRESHARKAPI extern
> #endif
I'm not sure if extern is sufficient to mark the function for export if
libtool is using -export-symbols. That may require some tweaking for
non-Windows platforms.
> you can define the API in the header files like this:
>
> // proto.h
>
> WIRESHARKAPI proto_tree* proto_tree_create_root(void);
>
> WIRESHARKAPI proto_item *
> proto_tree_add_item(proto_tree *tree, const int hfindex, tvbuff_t *tvb,
> const gint start, gint length, const guint encoding);
Looks good to me. Maybe WSPUBLIC or WSEXPORT would be a clearer name, but
that's a detail to be worked out.
> The has some advantages
>
> - one central place to define how the functions become part of the API
> in config.h
>
> - exactly one place of definition if a symbol is part of the API.
> Currently you define the symbol in header and DEF file.
>
> - It is visible immediately if a declaration in the header files is part
> if the API or not.
Vital. I keep finding things in header files I want to use, then have to
check the .def file to discover whether it's exported.
> What do you think about it?
I love it! Any objections, or can we get started on it?
> Andy
--Greg
