Re: Patch: suppress duplicate Fl_Printer::class_id

Removing the stub on OSX 10.6.8 with fltk 1.3.2 does not make dillo grow.

Sizes of dillo image; the first line counts shared libraries, and the
second overestimates, perhaps consistently, the size of the to-run
code:

- with Fl_Printer stub without class_id:
$ otool -L src/dillo | wc
      14      92    1370
$ ls -l src/dillo
-rwxr-xr-x  1 ...  staff  2407760 15 Sep 21:21 src/dillo

- without Fl_Printer stub:
$ otool -L src/dillo | wc
      14      92    1370
$ ls -l src/dillo
-rwxr-xr-x  1 ...  staff  2407760 17 Sep 00:05 src/dillo

If it's purpose has been overtaken by events, and it increases the
brittleness of the code, then I would be happy for it to be removed.

On 9/16/14, eocene <[email protected]> wrote:
> James wrote:
>> Building commit 317f010 (two days ago) of dillo, I got a duplicate
>> symbol on OSX 10.6.8 with gcc 4.2.1.  Here is the diff that suppresses
>> it.
>>
>> ----------------
>> $ hg diff
>> diff -r c09473fb7311 dw/fltkplatform.cc
>> --- a/dw/fltkplatform.cc	Sat Sep 13 09:46:28 2014 +0000
>> +++ b/dw/fltkplatform.cc	Sat Sep 13 23:49:26 2014 +1200
>> @@ -37,10 +37,10 @@
>>   * any need for currently. This stub prevents that. */
>>  class FL_EXPORT Fl_Printer : public Fl_Paged_Device {
>>  public:
>> -   static const char *class_id;
>> +//   static const char *class_id;
>>     Fl_Printer(void) {};
>>  };
>> -const char *Fl_Printer::class_id = "Fl_Printer";
>> +//const char *Fl_Printer::class_id = "Fl_Printer";
>
> To refresh my memory of the magnitude of what printer stuff we pull in
> without the stub, I commented out the stub -- and saw nothing to do with
> Fl_Printer with nm.
>
> I thought maybe this somehow had to do with the changes that Lauri Kasanen
> made to fltk last month like
> http://www.fltk.org/newsgroups.php?s10767+gfltk.commit+v10781
> http://www.fltk.org/newsgroups.php?s10787+gfltk.commit+v10787
> but I see that Manolo took out the Fl_Printer::class_id check in
> Fl_Text_Display in March 2012. 1.3.2 came out in...let's see...
> December 2012.
>
> So we should probably remove the stub altogether.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dillo-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.dillo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dillo-dev
>