Re: [AD] END_OF_MAIN removal patch for msvc

[Thomas Fjellstrom <tfjellstrom@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On November 19, 2008, Peter Wang wrote:
> On 2008-11-19, Stefanos A. <stapostol@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2008-11-19 at 19:11 +1100, Peter Wang wrote:
> > > On 2008-11-19, Thomas Fjellstrom <tfjellstrom@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > On November 18, 2008, Peter Wang wrote:
> > > > > No.  I may want to use Allegro in an environment where my code is
> > > > > not allowed to block in al_run().  I know it might not work on
> > > > > certain platforms, but that's my choice to make.
> > > >
> > > > All I really care about is making the api consistent. Meaning the
> > > > actual code the user has to write is identical on all supported
> > > > platforms. None of this "I don't have to do it here, so I won't, even
> > > > if it isn't compatible with other supported platforms".
> > >
> > > So you want to artificially prevent me from using Allegro in some
> > > situations because it might not be portable to some brain dead platform
> > > that I don't care about?  Right.
> >
> > Concrete example of such a situation where "my code is not allowed to
> > block in al_run()"?
>
> Say, running in a language interpreter which provides a foreign function
> interface where I can make calls into C function, but I can't call back
> into the other language.
>
> Or maybe I'm writing plugin for a web browser.
>
> > Any reason why you can't just fork before calling
> > al_init &  al_run?
>
> Why should I?  I'm not distributing my program to anyone, and I don't
> have a Mac.
>
> > I'm not saying al_run is the best or even a good
> > design, although I do believe it's better than the END_OF_MAIN macro.
>
> I know it's a better design, I proposed it.  But why enforce it
> where it's unnecessary?
>
> > What about the alternative, i.e. calling al_process_events periodically?
> > It has minimal impact to the API, it does not tie you to a paradigm you
> > may not care about, it does not block. Any downsides?
>
> To me, that's a huge impact.

A few (at most) functions calls is "huge"? more so than an inconsistent api 
that encourages making platform specific code?

> Thomas, the END_OF_MAIN() in A4 did cause trouble for people trying to
> dlopen() the Allegro .so file, because the .so file expects a
> _mangled_main_address symbol.  It is possible to hack around it on Linux
> by defining it manually but I'm not sure it works everywhere.

I know, I've loaded allegro as a plugin in things before. Its annoying, and 
unnecessary. But I really don't want to see the api be inconsistent. Even 
though I prefer to be flexible, flexibility is for power users. Allegro isn't 
really targeted at power users.

> Peter
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's
> challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win
> great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere
> in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/


-- 
Thomas Fjellstrom
tfjellstrom@xxxxxxxxxx