Re: Initialization of static anonymous-namespace members from a
dynamically loaded lib
On Jan 11, 6:43 pm, Keith H Duggar <dug...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
On Jan 10, 8:51 am, James Kanze <james.ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 10, 11:01 am, "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet"
<alf.p.steinbach+use...@gmail.com> wrote:
* James Kanze, on 10.01.2011 11:26:
On Jan 10, 12:05 am, "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet"
<alf.p.steinbach+use...@gmail.com> wrote:
* James Kanze, on 10.01.2011 00:03:
On Jan 9, 9:00 pm, "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet"<alf.p.steinbach
+use...@gmail.com> wrote:
* m0shbear, on 09.01.2011 21:56:
[...]
(I don't know of any that can dynamically load a
library. But despite the name, under Windows, a DLL is not a
library.)
Windows Dynamically Loaded Library, *nix Shared Library.
What's a Unix shared library? I've never heard the term before.
Try <url:http://www.google.com/search?q=%22shared+library%22>.
You can find anything using Google:-). It never occured to me.
I guess just basing my knowledge on the Posix standard and the
Sun manual. And conversations with other Unix specialists:
after all, .so didn't come from shared library, but from shared
object.
I would also point out that the Unix convention (I think) is to
prefix the library file with 'lib'. I'm not sure how far back in
history that convention spans but it would seem to indicate some
cognition of the "library" sense. Such as "library archive" and
"library shared object" for lib*.a and lib*.so respectively.
Yes. Good point: the Unix conventions are ambiguous. Of
course, in the end, it is neither a library (an ranlib'ed
archive, under Unix) nor an object file, but something rather
different from both. And while it works more like an object
file than a library, in most cases, it's used more like
a library---the file has some functions I want to call, so
I link against it, in order to get those functions. (In most
cases, as long as we're only talking about functions, and not
static initializers, the fact that I get everything, and not
just what I actually need, makes no real difference to me.)
The fact remains that in computer science, "library" means (or
always used to mean) a collection of object files, each of which
was included only if it resolved an unresolved external. When
dynamically linking, it's all or nothing.
So the Standard Template Library (STL) is a collection of object
files? Or the name violates the computer science sense?
Or we're dealing with something new:-). But in fact, I was
being too restrictive: you can have libraries with other things
than object files; the definition of library I used is really
only relevant to linkables.
There is a sense that STL violates the older conventions for
libraries. On the other hand, there doesn't seem to be another
word that fits, either. So some word will have to have its
meaning expanded, and library seems appropriate.
--
James Kanze