Namespaces and inter-library private symbols
Nicolas.Williams at sun.com
Tue Nov 10 16:48:55 EST 2009
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 02:08:18PM -0500, ghudson at mit.edu wrote:
> I would like to better understand why we have the accessor and when it
> should be used, if ever. I consider it an overly heavyweight solution
> to the problem. Tom tells me that the initial justification had
> something to do with Windows, but he didn't have details.
Ah, I bet the accessor is for pre-auth plugins / plugins in general, to
help avoid DLL hell. I think this is best kept separate.
So we're really just talking about naming conventions for non-public
interfaces. My preference is to not have a separate naming convention
for pubic vs. private symbols.
Vendors should just not ship k5-int.h and that's that. Developers
should have enough warning from the fact that they cannot find C
prototype declarations for functions that they think might be useful to
them but which ware internal.
More information about the krbdev