Re: [AD] acodec proposal

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


On 14 April 2010 02:33, Matthew Leverton <meffer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 4:17 AM, Peter Wang <novalazy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> You convinced me that recompiling acodec wasn't a big deal on Linux ;-)
>> I don't believe recompiling acodec is a big deal on Windows either.
>> People who have a problem with compiling Allegro can use a binary package.
>>
> It's important then that the public symbols stay the same, which isn't
> even a concern if the explicit loaders are removed.

Yes.

>> No, because I accepted your arguments for loading third party DLLs directly.
>>
> So you'd use, e.g.: dumb_load_it = dlsym(d, "dumb_load_it"), and your
> only reservation is about duplicating structures and definitions if
> headers aren't found?

Yes.

Peter




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