Ben Laurie wrote: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > jim 02/05/02 06:28:46 > > > > Modified: src/os/unix os.c > > Log: > > OK. This is admittedly anal. But the whole idea behind cpp macros > > is to avoid things like "we know NSLINKMODULE_OPTION_NONE is 0" > > and making such shortcuts as this. This makes it clear what exactly > > we are setting, and though admittedly verbose, the tradeoff of a > > few bytes of source is worth it :) > > Err? But what is the meaning of combining a NONE option with some other? > Does it mean "we're setting both some and no options"? Very Zen! >
The weirdness is due that NSLINKMODULE_OPTION_NONE is actually part of a triple play of NSLINKMODULE_OPTION_PRIVATE and NSLINKMODULE_OPTION_BINDNOW, each of which different handles how Darwin creates "modules". The old function call just allowed 0 or 1 (which was the same as NSLINKMODULE_OPTION_NONE and NSLINKMODULE_OPTION_BINDNOW, respectively) with no other "options" available. When Apple changed the API of the function, they added more capability. So the NSLINKMODULE_OPTION_NONE is to explicitly state that we are not binding at that time. The other option is to add other capability... we're simply setting bits (last arg is a bitfield flag basically). Functionally it's no diff, but I'd prefer being clear and safe :) For those masochists with more interest, I refer you to: http://developer.apple.com/techpubs/macosx/ReleaseNotes/CompilerTools.html -- =========================================================================== Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ "A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both and deserve neither" - T.Jefferson
