Re: [AD] set_config_file jumping around on OS X bundles

[Chris <chris.kcat@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Monday 22 August 2005 12:26 pm, Evert Glebbeek wrote:
> I'd rather not. I don't think there's much difference in adding a null
> vtable entry and adding one with functions filled in.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. AFIAK, if we add an extra vtable entry now 
that's empty on all platforms, we can fill it in later as long as the DLL 
doesn't get any extra global functions or variables. Since the vtable is/can 
be filled with static/non-global functions, simply filling it in later with a 
static function wouldn't break ABI compatiblity in either direction (as long 
as you take proper care that it can be NULL). Same with any global functions 
we'd need.. make the functions, but leave them as null-ops, then fix them up 
in 4.2.1.

But it's something we'd have to do now. If we add the extra global symbols 
now, the DLL should be fine when the functions themselves are filled in 
later. This won't break backwards ABI compatibilty since a 4.2.0 program 
would still work with a 4.2.1 DLL (all the same symbols are still present, 
and the struct sizes are the same). Unless the program tried to use the 
null-op functions, but as long as we don't announce it in the public API yet, 
it would be their fault for using it.