I am pleased to announce that I have successfully created a "freeglut" DLL file and executed one of the demo programs with it.  To do this I needed to make some trifling changes from what Don Heyse sent me and set a few project settings (compiler/linker flags).

        We need to do some serious thinking about file names.  I have already asked about renaming "freeglut.h" to be "glut.h" so that the application programs do not have to change their include lines in their code.  This was hailed as a good idea but it has gone nowhere.  Now we are faced with the question of having a static library and a dynamic link library, at least in the Windows version of "freeglut".  The following files are involved:

        - For the static library:  the header file ("*.h") and the library file ("*.lib")
        - For the dynamic library:  the header file ("*.h"), the interface file ("*.lib"), and the library itself ("*.dll").

The header file can be the same file for both libraries.  I think the DLL's interface file should have a different name from the static library file, but I am unsure and would appreciate hearing from other people.  The GLUT DLL is called "glut32.dll" and its corresponding interface file is "glut32.lib".  I suggest that we should call our DLL by the same name.  What we call the static library I do not know.  If we decide to give the static library the same name as the DLL interface file, it will obviously be "glut32.dll"; if we decide to make them different, I would vote for something like the present "freeglut.lib".

        Either way we had better act quickly, or else sheer inertia will force us into a de facto decision.

John F. Fay