13.10.2016, 20:39, "André Pönitz" <apoen...@t-online.de>: > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 08:01:57PM +0300, Konstantin Tokarev wrote: >> > I still consider the approach of not unloading plugins fundamentally >> > wrong. It only deepens the trench between Qt and valid approaches at >> > software architectures. >> >> I think not unloading plugins is fundamentally right thing to do, if >> user does not request unload explicitly. > > What should happen *if* the user requests unloading explictly?
I think it should be unloaded completely if platform supports that. > > Andre' > > PS: > >> * It's not supported on all platforms (e.g., uclibc and musl implement >> dlclose() as a stub). > > Qt was never about providing common subsets of all supported platforms. > >> * At application exit OS will unload plugins and clean up related >> resources much faster than it could be implemented with unload in >> destructors. > > I am not concerned about toy applications that gets started and closed > by the minute. * Do your applications load different plugins every minute? In many cases same plugins are needed for the whole lifetime of application. * In case of very large applications shutdown time is important as well, as it can become annoyingly large. -- Regards, Konstantin _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development