On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 17:02:30 -0400, Standa Opichal <opichals@...> =20
> Hmm, I got it differently. I thought that now the WinDom applications =20
> would not compile without libldg.
True, because windom library requires libldg for ldg_open(), ldg_close() =
If windom is build as an independant library (windom.slb or windom.ldg), =
then this dependency will go away.
> I tried to show that there should be a static lib with the default =20
> userdef stuff so that no LDG nor SLB is needed.
When we have an application, lets say DEMO.APP, most of the time, it =20
requiered some other files (DEMO.RSC) to work properly. We can add =20
USERDEF.LDG to the list, no ?
Keep in mind that userdef.ldg is not really required ! you can design a =20
RSC without extended object (thumb, underlined text...), it works !
>> but it seem that we can make an SLB version of WinDom but
>> is it really necessarly : one can take into account some political =20
>> aspect (for example, Mint developpers prefer SLB)...
Mint developpers are out of the scope. You can consider userdef.ldg as a =
private plugin design for the windom library. Mint developper won't use =20
userdef.ldg neither windom.ldg, althrough they are windom developper too =
;) The question is: "what's the best technical system between LDG and SLB=
for use as windom plugin ?". The answer is "none of them: the best system=
will be real shareable library support by mint", but for other systems, =20
LDG seems to be a better choice (works under plain TOS with nothing in =20
I'm not comparing LDG and SLB in general. This is a comparison for a very=
particular use (windom library under all kind of systems).
Maybe i'm wrong, but please discuss for that particular purpose (windom =20
library, and libraries for windom).
> Hm, it comes to my mind that it has at least less dependencies on other=
> libs as the slb_open() and slb_close() are already present as MiNT =20
> kernel syscalls. Therefore you don't need libldg to load extra sharable=
For a freemint/gcc developper with mintlib installed, and without ldg =20
installed, it's maybe a bit easier, yes.
For sozobon, purec and gcc281, someone have to write the header file that=
provide slb_* functions, and then the programmer has to install slb.h in =
/usr/include. I'm not sure that copying slb.h is easier than copying ldg.=
For developper, i don't think that installing ldg.h and libldg.a is so =20
hard (it's the only constraint, and it's only for developpers !)
Once again, for mint user, the good choice is definitively library =20
dynamically loadeable by mint.