Yep,
I think you are right. I started to look into DLLs too for windows
because I would like to have an iconx.dll but this is gonna take some time
I think. Same for unix. A shared library would also save memory in the
case more istances of an icon program are running at the same time. a
libiconx.so maybe in the next future :) Would you volunteer for such
project?
Federico
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federico Balbi - University of Texas at San Antonio
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - URL: http://www.geocities.com/fedebalbi
On Fri, 24 Nov 2000, David Gamey wrote:
> Sorry if I'm showing some ignorance of the implementation. It
> occurred to me that there must be a good reason that iconx was
> implemented as it was. It would have integrated into each
> platform environment better if the program invoked a local
> library such as a Unix shared object file or Windows dll. That
> would eliminate the need for the ICONX environment variable and
> could use normal program location.
>
> Just wondering.
>
> David
> _______________________________________________
> Unicon-group mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/unicon-group
>
_______________________________________________
Unicon-group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/unicon-group
