On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Phil Harvey <p...@philharveyonline.com>wrote:
> Thanks for the responses guys. That all makes sense. > > The only change that I'd propose is therefore that the Perl and Java > bindings: > > bindings/perl/libcproton_perl.so bindings/java/libproton-swig.so > > ... should both be renamed to libcproton.so. > > Compared to the other bindings, it seems inconsistent for the former to > state its Perl-ness in its name, and for the latter to state its Swig-ness. > > Thoughts? > Given what little I know of loading JNI stuff, that seems to make sense for Java. FWIW, the python and ruby bindings don't ever actually expose the name of the C extension library since in both cases we have the so-called "buttercream frosting layer" that wraps the raw C extension module. I would hope we'd have something similar for perl and Java so that these names shouldn't ever be visible to users. --Rafael
