I wasn't really following the previous string of e-mails (perhaps I should have). Can you give me an overview of what the problem is and why initializing CF in [NSCFType+load] doesn't work?
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 7:08 PM, Matt Rice <ratm...@gmail.com> wrote: > bah... so the __attribute__((constructor)) thing doesn't really > work.... it appears to have done _something_, > > apparently i'm told constructor priorities aren't supposed to work > across shared library boundries... > > and the effect that I got when using that priority was that it > inverted my constructor calling order relative to what it was > before... > > thus: it matched what David/Ludvoic were using... but it is still link > order dependent. This seems like a linker bug.. > > again, (irrelevent because of the shared library thing), but i'm told > that if constructors with priorities are supposed to be called before > constructors without priorities. > > anyhow, you may just want to drop that portion of the patch and/or see > if it inverted David/Ludovic's call order in which case we're back to > square 1.... > > otherwise maybe there is a way to lazily initialize these values as > they are needed. >
_______________________________________________ Gnustep-dev mailing list Gnustep-dev@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
