On Feb 12, 2008, at 4:03 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
There is nothing stopping anyone from making a .dll on Windows
with a setup function and sticking it in pd/extra. If someone
tried to load it, Pd would make it's best effort, and the setup
function won't create any inlets or outlets, so it would just sit
there.this of course is plain wrong.
the "setup"-function _never_ creates any inlets and outlets, or
even an object. it is the "new"-function (aka creator) that handles instantiation.it is perfectly possible to create a dll that does not provide any
objectclasses (and is still "loaded" by Pd). it is not possible to
instantiate such a nonexistant objectlass though - it would always
"just sit there" in dashed lines...
Yes, you're right, I didn't go into detail. Without the setup
function being called, the new function will never be called, and
therefore no inlets and outlets would be created. But this is
orthogonal to the thread.
The point remains, even though Pd objectclasses on Windows use the
same file extension as generic libraries (dll), it is not causing
problems.
.hc
The arc of history bends towards justice. - Dr. Martin Luther
King, Jr.