chicken-users
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Chicken-users] Mac OS X static library names


From: Brandon Van Every
Subject: Re: [Chicken-users] Mac OS X static library names
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 11:01:20 -0400



On 5/13/07, Thomas Christian Chust <address@hidden> wrote:


I would only change the behaviour of the build if it doesn't mean a lot
of work. If the library names were changed, though, I would try to keep
them identical across all platforms to reduce confusion of the users ;-)


Windows libraries are already gratuitously different, because in Windows-land, .lib is used as the suffix for both a dynamic stub library and a static library.  So, a -s postifx is used to distinguish the static libraries.  Other parts of the postfix are used to distinguish debug vs. release, i.e. libchicken-ds.lib.  More postfixes will be added if we ever decide to compile single vs. multithreaded libraries and etc.

Currently, Unix-y builds don't do any more than compile a static and a dynamic library.  There's no debug version, there's no multithreaded version, etc.  Since Unix-y / GCC suffixes are sane with respect to static vs. dynamic libraries, there's currently no reason to add postfixes to distinguish more cases.

Current GCC / Cygwin / MinGW implement suffixes correctly with respect to static vs. dynamic libraries.  This is the most convenient for the user.  I see no reason to mess that up in the name of gratuitous uniformity.  Mac OS X is just weird, so it's a case of whether it's worth doing something specific for their benefit, to make their lives easier when linking.

Hey I just had a brilliant idea.  We don't have to rename anything.  We could just symlink libchicken-s.a to libchicken.a.  Then the user can have his cake and eat it too.


Cheers,
Brandon Van Every



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]