Namespaces and inter-library private symbols

[Nicolas Williams]

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.

Nico
--