I still say we should use the C++ interface... all our other plugins do...
elrod
On Tue, 18 Apr 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 18 Apr, Scott Haug wrote:
> > If it is possible, I'd prefer to use the C++ interface, for now. I'm not very
> > knowledgable about developing for windows, and know little of its limitations
> > as far as dll's go. Someone else wrote the dll interface, so I'm not terribly
> > familiar with it. So if there's a solution which allows us to use the C++
> > interface for all platforms, I'm all for it.
>
> There isn't such a solution -- anytime that a program communicates to
> a library via the C++ interface (vtable) both programs need to be
> compiled with the same compiler. The C++ standard never standardized
> how the names should be mangled and therefore two different C++
> compilers cannot talk to each other.
>
> It sucks balls, but anytime you're creating a library that multiple
> applications from different compiler architectures need to use, you
> should use the standard C interface.
>
> > My next major goal for id3lib, however, is a full-fledged C interface. If
> > using the C++ interface for both platforms isn't tenable, I will speed up that
> > part of the project and get it out to you ASAP, possibly by next Monday.
> >
> > Let me know what you would like.
>
> The dll wrapper C interface is not terrible -- it will work ok. If you
> could expose that interface in linux as well, I would be very happy.
> This should not be tough -- I could lend a hand there if necessary.
>
>
> --ruaok Freezerburn! All else is only icing. -- Soul Coughing
>
> Robert Kaye -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://moon.eorbit.net/~robert
>
> _______________________________________________
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.freeamp.org/mailman/listinfo/freeamp-dev
>
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.freeamp.org/mailman/listinfo/freeamp-dev
