[Openmcl-devel] another make-record question

Cyrus Harmon ch-openmcl at bobobeach.com
Fri Aug 20 16:53:44 PDT 2004

On Aug 20, 2004, at 12:57 PM, Andrew P. Lentvorski, Jr. wrote:

> The bigger issue is that all the foreign interface stuff we do is just 
> a patch/hack around the real problem--dynamic libraries need to 
> actually carry the information that we currently only get via .h 
> include files.  If you could query the dynamic library directly for 
> its variables, constants, functions and function signatures, all this 
> stupid hackery goes away.
> Anybody up for changing ld and dylib? <said only half-jokingly>

But isn't this basically what the .cdb files are for? It doesn't bother 
me too much that we need to ship cdb files with shared libraries, as 
long as there's a nice clean way to do so. Certainly seems easier than 
changing ld and dylib!

But resolving the issues about what should be done at macro-expansion 
time and what should be done at runtime still seem pretty important.


More information about the Openmcl-devel mailing list