Re: [certi-dev] Comments regarding hla 1.3 imlpementation in Certi 3.4

[Jean-Philippe Lebel]

On 26/07/2011 5:39 AM, Eric Noulard wrote:
> Done in CVS HEAD. You may give it a try however we added another 
> method "displayMe()" which enables CERTI to easily trace every 
> launched exception (debug purpose) I may try to remove it from the 
> public API as well but it'll take me some more time since we really 
> want to keep the feature.

Maybe that function should be put in a #ifdef _DEBUG statement?

> DLC 1.3 document does not say that?
> Which "document" are you refering to?
>
> In fact I think we are not speaking of being DLC 1.3
> but being compatible with latest RTIG-NGv6
> and Pitch/MAK/Portico/.... 1.3 API right?
>
> I don't know for RTIG-NBv6 nor Pitch or Mak since
> I don't have them. but Portico NG6 compatible libs
> are built with the "lib" prefix on windows as well.
I've just read the SISO-STD-004-2004 DLC specification  and it seems 
that the libraries should be named librti13.dll and libfedtime13.dll.
Basically, you are right that changing the DLL's name to libRTI-NG and 
libFedTime would bring a binary compatibly between CERTI and Pitch, Mak 
and Portico.

I can confirm that Mak, Pitch and Portico use the same naming scheme 
(libRTI-NG.dll and libFedTime.dll) for their 1.3 bindings.

I think this would a good thing. We receive a lot of request from people 
switching between two RTI (for various reasons: speed, cost, 
installation problem, etc, etc, etc)

If you decide that change the name of the DLLs  , I would add CERTI to 
our automated testing system which would be great for both product.

Is there anyone else in the CERTI community who has an opinion on that 
question?

--
Jean-Philippe Lebel, ing., MBA
ForwardSim inc.
Tel.: 418-650-3493 ext 6001
Fax.: 418-650-5661