On Jun 15, 2007, at 12:48 AM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
Consider:
struct __attribute__((vsibility ("hidden"))) S {
void __declspec(dllimport) f();
};
At present, we give "f" hidden visibility. That seems odd since the
user has explicitly told us that the symbol is coming from another
shared library.
I'm planning to make any dllimport or dllexport attribute imply
default
visibility. Is that a bad idea?
Perhaps I'm mistaken, but the above seems to indicate to me that the
structure (and, therefore, all of its fields) are hidden, one of its
functions is from an external and visible source. Because nothing
outside of the translation unit that has S can access f directly (only
through a function pointer), I don't see a problem with marking it as
a hidden part of S. That is, as long as it doesn't affect the original
f()'s visibility.
I'll ask the opposite question: what would be gained by giving this
default visibility?
-bw
