"Marc Zeedar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm wondering if part of the > problem is that parts of RB are written in RB -- and since RB can't create > a UB now, does that make it more difficult to add that feature?
Not at all. Add the code that creates the UB and compile using the current version; this creates a non-native version that creates universal binaries. Then use this version to compile the code again, creating a native version. This is just the theory, of course, and in reality the process will be more complex, but there's no problem with the RB-in-RB approach in principle. - Michael Michael J. Hußmann E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW (personal): http://michael-hussmann.de WWW (professional): http://digicam-experts.de _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode: <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/> Search the archives of this list here: <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
