Nathaniel Smith njs at pobox.com
Sun Apr 5 08:08:16 EDT 2015

On Apr 5, 2015 3:09 AM, "David Cournapeau" <cournape at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 4:25 AM, Nathaniel Smith <njs at pobox.com> wrote:
>> IIRC there allegedly exist platforms where separate compilation doesn't
work right? I'm happy to get rid of it if no one speaks up to defend such
platforms, though, we can always add it back later. One case was for
statically linking numpy into the interpreter, but I'm skeptical about how
much we should care about that case, since that's already a hacky kind of
process and there are simple alternative hacks that could be used to strip
the offending symbols.
>> Depends on how much it lets us simplify things, I guess. Would we get to
remove all the no-export attributes on everything?
> No, the whole point of the no-export is to support the separate
compilation use case.

Oog, on further checking I guess this is still true as long as we are using
our heirloom mingw compiler on Windows. AFAIK all other compilers we care
about support -fvisibility=hidden or equivalent.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20150405/98565d76/attachment.html>

More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list