Unix Programming - Re: .so v/s .dll

This is Interesting: Free IT Magazines  
Home > Archive > Unix Programming > October 2004 > Re: .so v/s .dll





You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread. To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to this thread please [click here]

Author Re: .so v/s .dll
Paul Pluzhnikov

2004-10-18, 8:48 pm

Chuck Dillon <spam@nimblegen.com> writes:

> By default DLLs have their own "data segment" which is
> what I was referring to when I suggested they are not entirely "in
> process". Poor use of terms on my part.


But so do UNIX DSOs.

Where do you think static variables local to DSO reside?
That doesn't make them somehow "out of process".

> The point is that you have to jump through some hoops to build a DLL
> that is close to what an .so is on UNIX.


I understand what you are referring to, but I think you don't have
much (recent) experience with Windows DLLs.

To build a DLL that would function pretty close to a UNIX DSO (at
least WRT malloc) all you have to do is compile and link everything
with /MD switch.

> For example, using
> MicroSoft's implementation of the C runtime library (a DLL) can be
> problemattic. The memory/object management in the C runtime is
> partitioned relative to the main process.


Not if you compiled everything with /MD.

Cheers,
--
In order to understand recursion you must first understand recursion.
Remove /-nsp/ for email.
Sponsored Links






Free braindumps | Software forum | Database administration forum

Copyright 2003 - 2008 webservertalk.com