Compiling libpurple in Visual Studio

Etan Reisner pidgin at
Wed May 30 00:12:15 EDT 2007

On Tue, May 29, 2007 at 10:23:12PM -0500, Richard Laager wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-05-29 at 23:08 -0400, Etan Reisner wrote:
> > Unrelated to any Windows stuff doing something like this could help with
> > automated extraction of 'public' headers for use by language bindings.
> > Which I've thought about for a while to make keeping language bindings up
> > to date with the exportable 'public' functions we think should be bound
> > for plugins.
> Leveraging/Rewriting the code might be useful
> for this.

I haven't really looked at how those scripts do what they do (because I
don't know and don't particularly like python) but I have to imagine they
could be made significantly simpler if we had such markers.  Also, it
would mean we could prevent it (and loader plugins) from exporting
functions that need to exist but don't need to be exported (whether we
have any of these at the moment I'm not sure, but that's besides the point
for now).

In case I didn't make this clear enough I do not at all think this is
important, but was another thing the markers could get us (though not
necessarily both at the same time, windows building and selective
binding). It was just for the record.


More information about the Devel mailing list