[petsc-dev] PetscDLSym called on an empty handle

2010-08-05 Thread Lisandro Dalcin
On 5 August 2010 18:07, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Lisandro Dalcin wrote: >> >> On 5 August 2010 13:40, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: >> > What is the intended behavior of PetscDLSym when called on an empty >> > handle: >> > PetscDLSym(handle=PETSC_NULL, symbol, &value)

[petsc-dev] PetscDLSym called on an empty handle

2010-08-05 Thread Dmitry Karpeev
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Lisandro Dalcin wrote: > On 5 August 2010 18:07, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Lisandro Dalcin > wrote: > >> > >> On 5 August 2010 13:40, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: > >> > What is the intended behavior of PetscDLSym when called on

[petsc-dev] PetscDLSym called on an empty handle

2010-08-05 Thread Lisandro Dalcin
On 5 August 2010 13:40, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: > What is the intended behavior of PetscDLSym when called on an empty handle: > PetscDLSym(handle=PETSC_NULL, symbol, &value) > My understanding was that this should look for symbol in the symbol table of > the main executable. > This is based on what

[petsc-dev] PetscDLSym called on an empty handle

2010-08-05 Thread Dmitry Karpeev
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Lisandro Dalcin wrote: > On 5 August 2010 13:40, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: > > What is the intended behavior of PetscDLSym when called on an empty > handle: > > PetscDLSym(handle=PETSC_NULL, symbol, &value) > > My understanding was that this should look for symbol in

[petsc-dev] PetscDLSym called on an empty handle

2010-08-05 Thread Dmitry Karpeev
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 11:53 AM, Matthew Knepley wrote: > On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: > >> On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Matthew Knepley wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Dmitry Karpeev >> mcs.anl.gov>wrote: >>> What is the intended behavior of Pets

[petsc-dev] PetscDLSym called on an empty handle

2010-08-05 Thread Matthew Knepley
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: > On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Matthew Knepley wrote: > >> On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Dmitry Karpeev > mcs.anl.gov>wrote: >> >>> What is the intended behavior of PetscDLSym when called on an empty >>> handle: PetscDLSym(handle=PETSC

[petsc-dev] PetscDLSym called on an empty handle

2010-08-05 Thread Dmitry Karpeev
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Matthew Knepley wrote: > On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: > >> What is the intended behavior of PetscDLSym when called on an empty >> handle: PetscDLSym(handle=PETSC_NULL, symbol, &value) >> My understanding was that this should look for symb

[petsc-dev] PetscDLSym called on an empty handle

2010-08-05 Thread Matthew Knepley
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: > What is the intended behavior of PetscDLSym when called on an empty handle: > PetscDLSym(handle=PETSC_NULL, symbol, &value) > My understanding was that this should look for symbol in the symbol table > of the main executable. > This is base

[petsc-dev] PetscDLSym called on an empty handle

2010-08-05 Thread Dmitry Karpeev
What is the intended behavior of PetscDLSym when called on an empty handle: PetscDLSym(handle=PETSC_NULL, symbol, &value) My understanding was that this should look for symbol in the symbol table of the main executable. This is based on what happens in the Windows case (#ifdef PETSC_HAVE_WINDOWS_H)