Re: gcc visibility used by moz

[Benjamin Smedberg <benjamin at smedbergs dot us>]

Jason Merrill wrote:

> OK, you've convinced me that the compiler shouldn't override or complain 
> about explicit visibility attributes.  Do you have a problem with 
> implicit propagation of visibility in the absence of an attribute? 
> Specifically:
>
> Do you agree with implicitly giving template instantiations the minimum 
> visibility of the template and arguments unless explicitly overridden?

This is not what I would naturally expect, coming from a dllimport/export 
mindset, but I don't think it's a problem from the mozilla POV: all of our 
exports are explicitly declared if/when we use hidden visibility pragmas.

Is a pragma considered an explicit override? e.g.

class nsIAbstract {
  virtual void Bar();
};

#pragma GCC visibility push(default)
nsIAbstract* Getter();
#pragma GCC visibility pop

> Also, do you agree with warning about a class with greater visibility 
> than its data members/bases?

Sure... I would really like to disable this warning if possible, since it 
will be produced thousands of times in a mozilla build ;-)

--BDS