Frank Richter wrote:
+#define WC_STATICA "Static" +#if defined(__GNUC__) +# define WC_STATICW (const WCHAR []){ 'S','t','a', 't','i','c',0 } +#elif defined(_MSC_VER) +# define WC_STATICW L"Static" +#else +static const WCHAR WC_STATICW[] = { 'S','t','a','t','i','c',0 }; +#endif +#define WC_STATIC WINELIB_NAME_AW(WC_STATIC)
I'm curious, what is the reason for the special case handling for MSVC and GCC when we have to do the portable way anyway?
Felix
"Felix Nawothnig" felix.nawothnig@t-online.de wrote:
Frank Richter wrote:
+#define WC_STATICA "Static" +#if defined(__GNUC__) +# define WC_STATICW (const WCHAR []){ 'S','t','a', 't','i','c',0 } +#elif defined(_MSC_VER) +# define WC_STATICW L"Static" +#else +static const WCHAR WC_STATICW[] = { 'S','t','a','t','i','c',0 }; +#endif +#define WC_STATIC WINELIB_NAME_AW(WC_STATIC)
I'm curious, what is the reason for the special case handling for MSVC and GCC when we have to do the portable way anyway?
(const WCHAR []) cast is not portable (gcc only) and L"string" syntax produces different results on different platforms depending on the compiler's builtin wchar_t size.
Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
+#define WC_STATICA "Static" +#if defined(__GNUC__) +# define WC_STATICW (const WCHAR []){ 'S','t','a', 't','i','c',0 } +#elif defined(_MSC_VER) +# define WC_STATICW L"Static" +#else +static const WCHAR WC_STATICW[] = { 'S','t','a','t','i','c',0 }; +#endif +#define WC_STATIC WINELIB_NAME_AW(WC_STATIC)
I'm curious, what is the reason for the special case handling for MSVC and GCC when we have to do the portable way anyway?
(const WCHAR []) cast is not portable (gcc only) and L"string" syntax produces different results on different platforms depending on the compiler's builtin wchar_t size.
I'm aware of that, my question remains: Why do we _additionally_ provide two unportable ways when there is a portable one?
Felix
Felix Nawothnig wrote:
+#define WC_STATICA "Static" +#if defined(__GNUC__) +# define WC_STATICW (const WCHAR []){ 'S','t','a', 't','i','c',0 } +#elif defined(_MSC_VER) +# define WC_STATICW L"Static" +#else +static const WCHAR WC_STATICW[] = { 'S','t','a','t','i','c',0 }; +#endif +#define WC_STATIC WINELIB_NAME_AW(WC_STATIC)
I'm curious, what is the reason for the special case handling for MSVC and GCC when we have to do the portable way anyway?
I can see two reasons:
* The portable way adds a (non-standard) symbol. * The static string declaration may not be discarded by some compilers, so it may needlessly increase the size of our binaries.
Mike
Mike McCormack wrote:
I'm curious, what is the reason for the special case handling for MSVC and GCC when we have to do the portable way anyway?
I can see two reasons:
- The portable way adds a (non-standard) symbol.
This could be fixed by adding a _ prefix.
- The static string declaration may not be discarded by some compilers,
so it may needlessly increase the size of our binaries.
Unless MSVC or GCC do not do this optimization (and I'm sure both do) this is no argument.
Actually those 2 non-standard ways put additional burden on the optimizer - if one of those wide string literals is used multiple times the optimizer has to make sure that the compiler doesn't generate a copy for each reference (and I'm not so sure if GCC / MSVC do this, especially since writeable strings (yea, it's const but still) were only recently forbidden by GCC and I guess they are allowed in MSVC).
Felix
Felix Nawothnig wrote:
This could be fixed by adding a _ prefix.
Adding another prefix fixes nothing. The original Windows SDK headers don't export a symbol, and we do. It's simply good practice to try and be as close as possible to the original SDK.
Mike
-
Dmitry Timoshkov -
Felix Nawothnig -
Mike McCormack