Re: [aspell-devel] What needs to be done for next release?

[Gary Setter]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kevin Atkinson" <address@hidden>
To: "Gary Setter" <address@hidden>
Cc: <address@hidden>
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 1:09 AM
Subject: Re: [aspell-devel] What needs to be done for next
release?


> On Thu, 20 Jan 2005, Gary Setter wrote:
>
> > Hi Kevin,
> >
> > What needs to be done for the next release of Aspell?
>
> I take it you mean 0.61?  I have posted a TODO on this list a
while ago
>
> > What role
> > does Win32 support play in it?
>
> I do not have any specific Win32 plans.  If it looks like VC6
compliance is
> close than I may delay the release a bit.  Other than that I
myself do not
> plan to put any effort into it.
Understood
>
> > I'm wondering if anyone on this list has the free VC Toolkit
> > 2003. I downloaded it but it requires Window2000, and my
humble
> > system only has Windows98. The reason I bring it up is that
many
> > of the problems I had with VC6 may not be problems with the
newer
> > compiler. If so, I would quietly end my efforts to make
aspell
> > more compatible with VC6.
> >
> > The one issue that I can't imagine going away is how to
export
> > functions that are part of the Aspell libraries API. Would it
be
> > a good thing to submit a patch that marks the API functions
for
> > export?
>
> Well a lot of C API code is generated so it will be necessary
to modify
> the mk-src script.  I will not accept a patch that only
modifies the
> generated files.  Perhaps it will be best to describe the
changes needed
> and let me modify the script and send you a patch to try.
>
> But the Aspell utility currently uses a good deal of the
internal API.  If
> absolutely necessary I will accept code that marks the
necessary
> functions/methods to export.  However,
>   1) I hope to make the external (ie C) API powerful enough
that the
>      Aspell utility does not have to use any of the API.
>   2) I would rather find another way.  For example are there
any flags
>      you can pass in to export ALL symbols in a given namespace
or maybe
>      ones that match a regular expressions?
>
> -- 
> http://kevin.atkinson.dhs.org
>
Hi Kevin,
This is my description of the changes needed to export a symbol
from a Windows DLL file.
The key is using the __declspec() keyword on the symbol. You can
export a function, global variable, or a whole class, but you can
not export a whole namespace. The  __declspec() keyword  can take
several attributes, but we are only interested in two - dllimport
and dllexport. What I always do, is define a macros that defines
whether we are importing or export, which means, are we building
the main application or the library. I use those macro to define
one macro that has the right __declspec for the current build.
This is basically what the guy that did the Aspell 0.50 wrote:

#ifndef aspell_root_h
#define aspell_root_h

// The following ifdef block is the standard way of creating
macros which make exporting
// from a DLL simpler. All files within this DLL are compiled
with the ASPELL_EXPORTS
// symbol defined on the command line. this symbol should not be
defined on any project
// that uses this DLL. This way any other project whose source
files include this file see
// ASPELL_API functions as being imported from a DLL, wheras this
DLL sees symbols
// defined with this macro as being exported.
#ifdef WIN32PORT
# if defined( ASPELL_NO_EXPORTS )
#  define ASPELL_API
# elif defined( ASPELL_EXPORTS )
#  define ASPELL_API __declspec(dllexport)
# else
#  define ASPELL_API __declspec(dllimport)
# endif
#else
# define ASPELL_API
#endif

#endif

This header file went into each source file that involves
exported functions.
To export a function from /lib/speller-c.cpp I have this line:
extern "C" ASPELL_API CanHaveError * new_aspell_speller(Config *
config)

There may be better ways to define the ASPELL_API macro, but that
was what the previous version did.

BTW, I read and read the makefile, mk-src.pl and the pm and I
still don't see how something an intricate as speller-c.cpp could
be generated. Is it really generated?