Import libraries and Borland C (Was: Wholly unnecessary flame.)
Martin von Loewis
loewis at informatik.hu-berlin.de
Mon Oct 2 05:05:28 EDT 2000
More information about the Python-list mailing list
Mon Oct 2 05:05:28 EDT 2000
- Previous message (by thread): Import libraries and Borland C (Was: Wholly unnecessary flame.)
- Next message (by thread): Import libraries and Borland C (Was: Wholly unnecessary flame.)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> It shouldn't be hard to point Borland C at the VC stdio headers and > msvcrt.dll, but I don't actually know. This isn't a problem of differing > compilers/linkers but of there being no one stdio on the platform with a > frozen binary interface. Even Microsoft gives you three -- libc, libcmt, > msvcrt.lib.. Well, they made an attempt with crtdll.dll in NT, but that seems to be so broken that nobody uses it. > Like Bruce Dodson later said, just don't pass FILE* across .dll boundaries. > Likewise there's no guarantee of being able to delete/free new or malloced > memory across .dll boundaries. At least not w/o specifying and making > available functions to work with them. Or drop down to something more > guaranteed, like CoTaskMemAlloc and CreateFile. On the malloc/free front, I think python.dll is doing quite good: all deallocations are done by the same extension module that did the original allocation [somebody correct me if that is not the case]. On passing FILE*, there is a proposal to wrap the stdio routines with Py functions, so extensions would always get the stdio library that Python was built with. Regards, Martin
- Previous message (by thread): Import libraries and Borland C (Was: Wholly unnecessary flame.)
- Next message (by thread): Import libraries and Borland C (Was: Wholly unnecessary flame.)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-list mailing list