From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue May  6 12:51:54 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0300937B404
	for <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>; Tue,  6 May 2003 12:51:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nagual.pp.ru (pobrecita.freebsd.ru [194.87.13.42])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3B0043F3F
	for <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>; Tue,  6 May 2003 12:51:52 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from ache@pobrecita.freebsd.ru)
Received: from pobrecita.freebsd.ru (ache@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by nagual.pp.ru (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h46JpprO060241;
	Tue, 6 May 2003 23:51:51 +0400 (MSD)
	(envelope-from ache@pobrecita.freebsd.ru)
Received: (from ache@localhost)
	by pobrecita.freebsd.ru (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h46JppiC060240;
	Tue, 6 May 2003 23:51:51 +0400 (MSD)
Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 23:51:51 +0400
From: "Andrey A. Chernov" <ache@nagual.pp.ru>
To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>
Message-ID: <20030506195151.GA60115@nagual.pp.ru>
References: <20030505205051.GA40572@nagual.pp.ru>
	<20030505231135.GA21953@madman.celabo.org>
	<20030505231837.GA44533@nagual.pp.ru> <xzpy91k3j9n.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
	<20030506170823.GI83663@lucky.net> <xzpllxkez78.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
	<20030506182756.GA57720@nagual.pp.ru> <xzp8ytjgbq4.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
	<20030506190747.GA59160@nagual.pp.ru> <xzp1xzbg8zc.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <xzp1xzbg8zc.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i
cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: `Hiding' libc symbols
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture
	<freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 19:51:54 -0000

On Tue, May 06, 2003 at 21:39:51 +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:

> No.  It will lead to surprising results if the file that includes
> <math.h> really does use sin(), but if it doesn't there is no reason
> why the other file can not define an external symbol named sin because
> sin is in the application namespace in that file.

If some file includes <math.h> even not using any functions from it, it 
declares namespace visibility for whole application.

> > About c), at this moment we discuss functions namespace only, i.e. linker 
> > "T" class.
> 
> So you admit that your solution is incomplete?  In that case, why do
> you insist that it is superior to Jacques Vidrine's solution, which
> addresses all cases without requiring us take the linker off the
> vendor branch and make it unusable for non-hosted applications?

It is incomplete in the same way as Jacques one since we both discuss only
functions so far. The difference is that my approach move us towards
standards conformance while Jacques one to opposite direction.