On Nov 19, 2012, at 1:54 AM, Mike Hommey <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 10:29:58PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 12:29:37PM -0800, Jason Evans wrote: >>> On Nov 7, 2012, at 10:40 PM, Mike Hommey wrote: >>>> From: Mike Hommey <[email protected]> >>>> >>>> When statically linking jemalloc, it may be beneficial not to export its >>>> symbols if it makes sense, which allows the compiler and the linker to do >>>> some further optimizations. >>>> --- >>>> […] >>> >>> This looks to me like it will cause redefined symbol warnings. Does it? >> >> Why would it? > > If you're thinking about redefined macros, that won't happen, because > autoconf also replaces #define MACRO foo when it handles > AC_DEFINE(MACRO). Which is why it works without adding a #undef > JEMALLOC_EXPORT in the first place.
That was indeed my thought. I prefer to only use autoconf to replace #undef definitions, but in this case the idiom would be needlessly messy. Thanks, Jason _______________________________________________ jemalloc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://www.canonware.com/mailman/listinfo/jemalloc-discuss
