Proposal for the assignment of fixed ordinals to exported functionsin kfw dlls

[Ken Raeburn]

On Oct 7, 2007, at 23:50, Jeffrey Altman wrote:
> Not at all.  In fact, we could mark the private symbols as NONAME and
> make them only accessible via the ordinal if we really wanted to make
> them private.

As long as our own libraries can still access them.  Perhaps it would  
be a good idea...

> Of course, that would break third party apps that currently rely on
> their presence.

Of which there should be none, right?

Ken