[ODE] Why no __declspec(dllexport)

[Martin C. Martin]

gl wrote:

>>While microsoft's interface gives you a little more control,
> 
> Let's say you have a class member function - you
> can't just make it static if it relies on the 'this' pointer.

Actually, that's a different meaning of "static."  But your point 
stands: you can't make member functions local to a compilation unit (as 
far as I know.)  That's the "little more control" part I mentioned.

> And what about globals that you _don't_ want exported?

Do exactly what ODE does: Make them static.

>>Right, and I'm pointing out that (a) DLLs are similar in use to static
>>libraries
> 
> ... but behind the scenes the functions are dynamically imported at runtime,
> whilst static lib references are resolved at link time - hence the different
> mechanisms.

Right, but the issues are the same, the only (significant) difference is 
the time the linking happens.  But we're discussing how to specify what 
should & shouldn't be linked.  That's independent of compile time vs. 
run-time linking.

> So is 'static' used on other compilers to specify DLL exports?

Yes, on other operating systems.

You're also missing my point: specifying exports for DLLs is 
conceptually the same as specifying exports for static libs.

- Martin



#################################################################
#################################################################
#################################################################
#####
#####
#####
#################################################################
#################################################################
#################################################################