On Wed, 10 Feb 2010, Szak�ts Viktor wrote: Hi,
> > I though about it but in practice it means that it's necessary to create > > separate library which is not included by harbour*.dll or hack make files > > to exclude single file from harbour shared library. Personally I do not > > like such hacks because sooner or later they are exploited by sth, i.e. > > it's not possible to recompile current Harbour code with HB_DYNLIB macro > Which should never be necessary in normal situation. > IOW if such is required to access any standard Harbour > feature, it's a bug by itself to be fixed. Interesting, Important for me feature you are calling bug :) I hope that in the future we will not lost possibilities to build Harbour with and without exported symbols using some optional settings. > > so I would prefer such library though global filter used to excluded files > > from harbour shared library seems to be acceptable. > I'd certainly be better. We can add such extra library > f.e. by the name 'maindll'. IMO it should have different name. Such library will be used for code which should not be included in dynamic/shared library and above name suggested completely different usage. I'd rather prefer sth like 'hbstatic'. best regards, Przemek _______________________________________________ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) [email protected] http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
