[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Idle 0.10 alpha
- From: Thomas Lauer <thomas.lauer@...>
- Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2007 13:25:12 +0100
Duck <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> 3. It's Windows only, which happens to make it useless to me. (I am
> looking for portability across Windows, Linux and the BSDs.)
As things stand in the moment, I can't see a Linux version this side of
summer 2008. Sorry about that, but I am not a Linux developer. There are
a few people who currently use the Windows version and *may*, once I
release the source code, try their hand in porting it.
> Another thing: if I were you I'd also offer an EXE which is statically
> linked, so you can make a single-file program (no DLL required). Where the
> DLL is useful is if you have multiple Idle EXEs, so each EXE is much
Technically, that wouldn't be too difficult. However, there are reasons,
mostly of a non-technical nature, why I have currently no plans to
release a version of the compiler that produces stand-alone EXE files.
> For these cases I suggest you also offer a non-UPXed version of the DLL.
> I haven't explained that very well. But UPXing a DLL which gets loaded
> more than once means you end up with the DLL's code in memory, as
> non-shared data, multiple times.
Yeah, I know very well what you mean. However, you can easily decompress
any UPX'd EXE or DLL by simply calling 'UPX -d <filename>'. The result
is just the plain, original DLL. But it's a good idea to include a hint
somewhere in the documentation to this effect. I may even put the
decompressed DLL on the website. Thanks for reminding me.
web : http://thomaslauer.com/start