[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: dynamic object searching (was: Re: Dynamic objects)

From: Tim Murphy
Subject: Re: dynamic object searching (was: Re: Dynamic objects)
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 17:48:42 +0100

On 30 April 2013 17:28, Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> wrote:

> Since you can't (in my recent experience) load a 64-bit DLL into a 32-bit
> program, the real issue is what architecture was make itself built with.

That's unrelated.  I was talking about the fact that

      load foo.so

is inherently non-portable, whereas

      load foo
      load foo$(SOEXT)

(with $(SOEXT) determined automatically by Make) is much more

Everything's non-portable - trying to solve this doesn't help at all - just complicates the rest of the process.

I have to generate those plugins anyhow so there's all the non-portable code to call whatever compiler and linker are needed for that particular platform.  All of that code has to specify the extension anyhow so what do I gain?

i.e. I don't just have
load X.dll

I have to supply the recipe to build it on windows:

  cl.exe  /address@hidden .... # use microsoft's compiler

and on Linux
   gcc -o address@hidden ... # using gcc

On top of this, the extension doesn't help when you're on 32-bit platforms because it doesn't indicate whether the plugin is 32 or 64 bit.

So to me it just seems like a complication because it can't solve the whole problem that make generally needs explicit effort to support builds on multiple platforms.



You could help some brave and decent people to have access to uncensored news by making a donation at:


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]