Re: [boost] [all] Request for out of the box visibility support

Subject: Re: [boost] [all] Request for out of the box visibility support
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-08-18 17:46:35

On 8/18/2018 11:19 AM, Robert Ramey via Boost wrote:
> On 8/18/18 6:58 AM, Edward Diener via Boost wrote:
>>
>> I do not see any difference, vis-a-vis the visibility problem 
>> discussed, between dynamically loaded shared libraries or statically 
>> loaded shared libraries. 
> 
> visibility isn't really an issue with static libraries. visibility 
> decreases the number of externally visible symbols.  In linking a static 
> library this might decrease linking times - but I haven't noticed it and 
> I never received complaints about it.  I think that the BOOST visibility 
> macros are defined to nothing for static builds.

I was not referring to static libraries.

You used the phrase "dynamically loaded shared libraries". Did you just 
mean "shared libraries" as opposed to "static libraries" ? Whether a 
shared library is dynamically loaded or statically loaded it is still a 
shared library. My point is that visibility is not affected by whether a 
shared library is dynamically loaded or statically loaded.