[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Yet another reason to crash with multiple Lua runtime?
- From: Ross Berteig <Ross@...>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 12:51:42 -0700
On 7/16/2008, Shmuel Zeigerman wrote:
Ross Berteig wrote:
> I would much rather see someone cleverer than I figure out
how to do the
> magical forward to the statically linked core.
Isn't this what you're talking about?
Yes, that is exactly what I meant. Now if we can just convince
all the vendors that include an embedded Lua core in their
products to provide access to that proxy (along with access to
require() and module() of course) to their third-party script
environments then it would be possible to use many of the
readily available binary modules. Personally, I'm wishing for
Adobe Lightroom to permit require(), but I'm certain there are
plenty of other use cases.
Even better would be to work out how to give Windows the
impression that the DLL had been loaded in the running process
without having to actually have the file be present.... I know
I've seen some code injection tricks that work kind of like
that, and at least one utility that temporarily installs a
device driver at runtime from a single, monolithic EXE file, so
it should be possible.
The same technique should be possible to use to get a single
copy of other supporting DLLs such as libzip, libtiff, and the like.
Ross Berteig Ross@CheshireEng.com
Cheshire Engineering Corp. http://www.CheshireEng.com/