Re: Ada "library only" compiler ?

[Pascal Obry <pascal@obry.net>]

Le 22/07/2012 06:59, Shark8 a �crit :

> No, not really. The whole point of dynamic- vs. static-linking
> [libraries] is that in the case of the former it eliminates the need
> to recompile [your application] if the underlying DLL's
> implementation is changed, with static-linking this is not so, any
> change in the library mandates a recompile/relink of your
> application.

Yes I know, but we are talking about API there. If the API change the
fact that we are using a DLL instead of plain C code does not change
this fact.

> With interfacing to another language the compiler has to know certain
> things about that language, most specifically symbol-generation,
> argument ordering and calling-conventions. {This is the whole reason
> for the convention pragma.}

Likewise for DLL, the convention must be Stdcall. And for C it can be
defined as C, Stdcall (to name only those 2).

> Not necessarily. So long as the Win32 API DLL presents the same
> interface to the world its internals could be ASM, Prolog, Ada, LISP,
> etc.

So long that the C code provides the same API with the same convention...

> And so long as the compiler is able to generate calls/returns to
> properly interface with the DLL the actual language of the compiler
> doesn't matter either.

Right.

Again at the API level I really don't see what the difference here. The
API definition has nothing to do with DLL. The API is defined by the
vendor or the library implementer. Then this code can be delivered
statically or as a shared library, it is only a way to encapsulate the code.

Pascal.

-- 

--|------------------------------------------------------
--| Pascal Obry                           Team-Ada Member
--| 45, rue Gabriel Peri - 78114 Magny Les Hameaux FRANCE
--|------------------------------------------------------
--|    http://www.obry.net  -  http://v2p.fr.eu.org
--| "The best way to travel is by means of imagination"
--|
--| gpg --keyserver keys.gnupg.net --recv-key F949BD3B