Well, there is numerous reasons ranging from very simple (ever tried to wrap a vararg func?), to complex (dynamic message systems, virtual machines, script language implementations/bindings, interpreters, etc.).
The library can be useful without having support for dynamically linked libraries on the target platform - I guess we don't even have to argue about the fact, that "dynamic libraries" aren't the best thing the world has seen... The point of dyncall is not "load a dll/so and call a function", but to allow you to do something you simply can't in C. For me, the Plan9 port was mainly instructional, and who knows, maybe someone finds it useful... > Hi ! > > One question - why ? > > http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/dynamic-linking/ > > On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 1:04 AM, Tassilo Philipp > <tphil...@potion-studios.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I finished my dyncall/Plan9/x86 port - thanks again Cinap and Steve for >> pointing me into the right directions about the Plan9 calling >> convention, >> a few weeks ago. >> >> Anyways, dyncall has Plan9 support for x86, starting with Version 0.6, >> maybe someone likes it or finds it useful (www.dyncall.org). >> >> Cheers, >> Tassilo >> >> >> > > > > -- > С наилÑÑÑими пожеланиÑми > Ðилкин СеÑгей > With best regards > Zhilkin Sergey > >
