Yeah, I think I punted on datasets. Now I have to look harder.
Actually, if you want to pitch in here, it would be great. The 3.4
dataset way just can't work in binary libraries as currently spec-
ed. We'd have to treat them more like resources -- just save the LZX
to the binary so that it can be compiled correctly when the binary is
linked in.
On 2007-02-07, at 12:36 EST, Henry Minsky wrote:
We had a big change about how top level datasets are compiled into
apps
between 3.4 and legals; in 3.4 they are inlined as swf byte code to
build
the dataset, whereas in
legals they are compiled in as XML strings that get passed as init
arg to a
LzDataset to get parsed and instantiated at runtime. I thought I saw
something in ptw's changeset that was special casing datasets to
not be put
into in libraries? I need to look again...
On 2/7/07, P T Withington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 2007-02-07, at 11:16 EST, Jim Grandy wrote:
> On Feb 7, 2007, at 8:06 AM, Adam Wolff wrote:
>> diamond relies on the behavior where if I don't specify a file
name
>> for a directory in an include, it looks for the library.lzx file
>> in that
>> directory. e.g.
>>
>> <include href="foo/bar"/>
>>
>> Actually includes
>> foo/bar/library.lzx
>>
>
> Is this documented behavior? The comments at the top of lps/
> components/library.lzx &co. suggest these files are only used by
> the documentation generator. Assuming that is true, I've been
> modifying the library.lzx files in the components to suit the
> refguide.
I don't know where it is documented, but the compiler will definitely
implicitly add library.lzx to a directory in an include (and has done
so for as long as I can remember).
The binary library changes make the compiler search for library.lzo
before loading library.lzx.
It is _supposed_ to be the case that if your library contains auto-
includes, and you binary compile your library, the auto-includes will
_not_ be included in the binary, but will be auto-loaded when you
load your library (trying to mimic as much as possible the normal
library behavior).
Pablo's test reveals another screw-case that is not handled: You
include a library and elsewhere in your program also a sub-library
of that library. Then you binary-compile the library. The binary
library gets loaded, but the compiler does not realize that that
implies the sub-library is also loaded, so it tries to re-load the
sub-library and creates duplicate definition warnings. I will have
to add some annotation to binary libraries to note all the sub-
libraries that comprise the library. [er, Mr. Strunk, did I use that
word correctly? I've always wanted to find a use for it.]
--
Henry Minsky
Software Architect
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
