Re: Help- selective symbol exposure after link

fjh@murlibobo.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fergus Henderson)
8 Feb 1997 22:51:18 -0500

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[7 earlier articles]
Re: Help- selective symbol exposure after link aeb@saltfarm.bt.co.uk (1997-01-29)
Re: Help- selective symbol exposure after link albaugh@agames.com (1997-01-30)
Re: Help- selective symbol exposure after link leichter@smarts.com (Jerry Leichter) (1997-01-30)
Re: Help- selective symbol exposure after link root@jacob.remcomp.fr (1997-02-02)
Re: Help- selective symbol exposure after link Dave@occl-cam.demon.co.uk (Dave Lloyd) (1997-02-07)
Re: Help- selective symbol exposure after link Dave@occl-cam.demon.co.uk (Dave Lloyd) (1997-02-07)
Re: Help- selective symbol exposure after link fjh@murlibobo.cs.mu.OZ.AU (1997-02-08)
Re: Help- selective symbol exposure after link ok@cs.rmit.edu.au (1997-02-11)
Re: Help- selective symbol exposure after link pfox@lehman.com (Paul David Fox) (1997-02-11)
Re: Help- selective symbol exposure after link jan@fsnif.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de (Jan Vorbrueggen) (1997-02-16)
Re: Help- selective symbol exposure after link Dave@occl-cam.demon.co.uk (Dave Lloyd) (1997-02-20)
Re: Help- selective symbol exposure after link rfg@monkeys.com (1997-02-27)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: fjh@murlibobo.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fergus Henderson)
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 8 Feb 1997 22:51:18 -0500
Organization: Comp Sci, University of Melbourne
References: 97-02-045
Keywords: MSDOS, linker

Dave Lloyd <Dave@occl-cam.demon.co.uk> writes:


>> [Do DLLs still have to work with no static data? I recall that as
>> being one of their more inconvenient shortcomings. -John]
>
>NT DLLs require subsequent code to do something special to access
>imported static data (sort of analogous to the jump table used for code
>imports).


Do the NT compilers do this subsequent fancy footwork automatically,
or does it require explicit programmer intervention?
(Specifically, how about the gnu-win32 gcc for NT?)


>[This is way off topic, though I'm happy to get the answer to my question,
>so I'd better end this thread. -John]


I think discussion of DLLs and shared libraries is highly on-topic for
this group. As a practicing compiler writer I'm very interested in
this stuff. Shared libraries are an important optimization technique.
Trying to implement support for shared libraries on a bunch of
different systems is a very difficult job, mostly because every system
does shared libraries differently, but partly also because good
documentation is hard to come by.


--
Fergus Henderson <fjh@cs.mu.oz.au>
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh>
PGP: finger fjh@128.250.37.3
[Good point, discuss away. What I was thinking off-topic was specific warts
of the Windows DLL implementations. -John]


--


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.