Re: Problem with LT 2.1a

[Bob Friesenhahn]

On Wed, 6 Sep 2006, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:

> * Bob Friesenhahn wrote on Wed, Sep 06, 2006 at 05:37:20PM CEST:
> > On Thu, 7 Sep 2006, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
> > > On Sep 7, 2006, at 12:10 AM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > > > We could add another interface
> > > >  lt_dlopen_flags (const char *filename, int flags);
> > > I'd prefer to be more specific - lt_dlopen_global(const char * filename)
>
> Well, the disadvantage being that whenever the next flag comes up that
> we would like to be able to choose, we cannot just add another #define
> to ltdl.h, but have to invent yet another function.  (Not now, but in
> some years another flag may just be portable enough; or simply necessary
> for some reason.)

Adding functions is easier than adding flags.  The POSIX thread APIs I 
mentioned use functions to set option flags in an implementation 
defined opaque structure.  This is a very powerful approach since the 
application never knows the form of the options structure so there are 
no ABI problems.  With this approach, adding a new option is as simple 
as adding some more accessor functions.

If the application wants to use an already installed libltdl, then it 
is very easy to test for supported functions using autoconf.

Bob
======================================
Bob Friesenhahn
address@hidden, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
GraphicsMagick Maintainer,    http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/