Hi JS, Thanks for the testing.
The fact that Change #1 does change a function to become a inline implementation does change the ABI, not a problem from 2.9.x but does rule out being part of OSG-2.8.1 as so far there has been not ABI breaks despite all the bug fixes. Feedback from others please :-) Robert. On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 3:19 PM, Jean-Sébastien Guay <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Robert, Hartmut, > >> The changes seem sound, I'd like to see if there are any side effects >> though, so I'll test the changes in a fresh build linked to a small >> application tomorrow. I'll let you know what I find out. > > Change #1 (refer to the original e-mail from Hartmut) is ok, it's a small > function that will now be inlined instead of in the DLL, preventing the > fopen call being made in a different DLL context than the fclose call. The > penalty for such a small function is small, so I don't see a problem. > Perhaps a comment could be added explaining why this function is inline > while all others are extern... > > Change #2 is interesting. Trying to be diligent (since /a priori/ I didn't > know anything about these settings), I looked up the defines Hartmut added, > and found this: > > http://blogs.msdn.com/vcblog/archive/2008/05/15/vc-runtime-binding.aspx > > It seems that the behavior for resolving the C++ runtime version > dependencies changed between VC2005 and VC2008. The defines Hartmut added > just bring VC2008's settings back to VC2005 defaults. So in theory, it > should have no effect for VC2005 either since the default was already set > that way. > > I wonder what the implication on user applications will be, considering the > information on that page. But I guess if the developer ships the VC runtime > DLLs (that he compiled the app with) with his application, or the user has > that version or newer of the VC runtime installed, it should be ok. That's > what happens for VC2005 after all. > > It's true that perhaps those defines should be optional (I would make them > default to on, as it will probably not change anything for most users but > those who will have the same problems as Hartmut had will want to turn it on > - people who want to turn it on will be few and will know the reasons why). > Perhaps that should be added to the patch before final submission. > > I've compiled OSG and an application I was working on with these changes, > and didn't get any adverse change in behavior. Of course, I'm still using > VC2005. Perhaps we could wait for someone else using VC2008 to test as well, > but as I said, I think the changes are OK even in that context. > > Hope this helps, > > J-S > -- > ______________________________________________________ > Jean-Sebastien Guay [email protected] > http://www.cm-labs.com/ > http://whitestar02.webhop.org/ > _______________________________________________ > osg-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org > _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
