Re: [AD] acodec proposal

[ Thread Index | Date Index | More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives ]


On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 1:04 AM, Thomas Fjellstrom <tfjellstrom@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> flac would be static linked into allegro_acodec-FLAC.dll in most cases.
> instant surety that it would work fine.
>
We already have allegro_flac.dll that people can statically link flac
with. allegro_acodec-FLAC is the same thing as what we already have,
just with a longer name. It doesn't give us anything useful, in my
opinion.

> In case that dynamic linking the
> dependency into the loadable modules is supported, dlopen/LoadLibrary will
> fail, and the format support won't be added.
>
Dynamic linking always has the potential to fail regardless if dlopen
or a traditional compile time link is used.

e.g., alleg42.dll files aren't even guaranteed to be compatible across
versions or compilers. I cannot image that using dlopen would be any
worse in real situations. I'm pretty sure SDL uses it to load audio
formats, and it's basically infinitely more popular than Allegro. ;)

--
Matthew Leverton




Mail converted by MHonArc 2.6.19+ http://listengine.tuxfamily.org/