[PD-dev] help me with my DLL snafu
Hans-Christoph Steiner
hans at eds.org
Mon Jan 9 17:29:08 CET 2006
On Jan 9, 2006, at 9:33 AM, Thomas Grill wrote:
>
>> so you can just use the native .so extension
>
> Sorry, i forgot to mention it, but as stated in my original proposal
> (in December), platform-native shared library extensions
> (.so,.dll,.dylib) should be supported as well.
Why do we need to support the platform-specific shared lib formats? I
think this will just add confusion for no real gain that I can see.
> Still, to avoid name-clashes with system or third-party libraries
> having a pd-specific extension is important. .pdo doesn't sound too
> bad (.pdx and .pdb don't seem to be good, because ambigous choices)
Do we really need to use a 3 character extension? I mean how many
people are really using DOS any more? .pd_darwin and .pd_linux have
been working fine for a long time, Windows has no problem with .jpeg
and .html for example.
.pdo is taken by Microsoft. It looks like basically all .pd?
extensions are taken:
http://filext.com/alphalist.php?extstart=%5EP
We could make it technically correct (for single file objects at least)
and use .pdclass. But .pdext seems acceptable.
.hc
________________________________________________________________________
____
"Computer science is no more related to the computer than astronomy is
related to the telescope."
-Edsger
Dykstra
More information about the Pd-dev
mailing list