Okay, so I'm closer to an answer.
My problem was that there are three (well, six with headers) files in the
IDOM directory that are apparently artifacts. These are:
IDTreeWalkerImpl.*
IDNodeIteratorImpl.*
IDRangeImpl.*
Building in these files causes the symbol conflicts with similarly named
files in the DOM implementation.
Can Andy or Tinny confirm that these are in fact unwanted, and that the like
files in the DOM directory suffice? And remove these files eventually if
they're artifacts of the bring-up?
Thanks!
-jdb
On 5/23/01 1:30 PM, "Andy Heninger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would have guessed that putting both DOMs into the same static library
> would work. The classic DOM and IDOM are built into the same DLL on
> Windows, so I would have expected that any symbol conflicts would have
> showed up there too.
>
> Tinny is working on finishing up the missing parts of the IDOM
> implementation, so you might want to ask about getting her latest files.
>
> Andy Heninger
> IBM, Cupertino, CA
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "James Berry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Xerces C Dev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: "Andy Heninger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 11:15 AM
> Subject: Re: Static library
>
>
>> Hi Andy,
>>
>> I ran into a problem the other day in trying to integrate the IDOM
> sources
>> into the MacOS build, which builds currently as a static library. I was
>> hoping to just include the IDOM, as well as the classic DOM, in the
> library.
>> But they seem to have some symbol conflicts between them.
>>
>> Any comment on what the intent is here?
>>
>> -jdb
>>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
