Bodo Moeller wrote:
> The callback function is not dynamically linked, it is passed as a
> function pointer. The functions that *take* such a function parameter
> will be dynamically linked, but if we have two versions of them (a new
> one with _ex suffix, and the old one with the same prototype that it
> always had) there can be no problems of this kind. However you are
> right if "strange" calling conventions apply also to the callback
> function itself (i.e. to the one which is passed as a function
> pointer); but I don't think this is likely to be an actual problem,
> given that the library currently relies on that calling functions
> without having a declaration of the argument list (which, I think, is
> equivalent to calling a function with variable parameters, although
> I'm not really sure of this) works as expected.
Under Windoze, callbacks are traditionally declared with CALLBACK in the
prototype, which, I think, uses Pascal linkage (the afore-mentioned
"non-C" calling convention). BTW, IIRC, this also causes the name to
become all uppercase.
Cheers,
Ben.
--
http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
- Indira Gandhi
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
