Re: Compiler ABI changes and XPCOM components

Christian Biesinger wrote:
> Pete Collins wrote:
> 
>> Er, the whole point of XPCOM is to abstract binary libs from the 
>> interfaces they implement.
> 
> 
> There is nothing XPCOM can do about this. Different C++ Compilers mangle 
> function names differently, so that a gcc3-compiled Plugin will expect a 
> different function name from what actually exists on a gcc2-compiled 
> Mozilla.

exactly!

however, it is important to point out, that most, if not all, components 
that I have looked at do import something from xpcom.

I have been working on a short article which discusses some of the 
ins-and-outs of xpcom component development with reuse in mind.  I will 
try to post it later this week if I can get some folks to review it.

The rub of article is: if you import xpcom and the symbol isn't listed 
in nsXPCOM.h, your probably going to feel the pain of a compiler upgrade.

Doug Turner
[email protected]