Is it just me or is anyone else a bit annoyed/jealous/whatever about people making `DLL's` for BlitzMax which can only be used on Windows machines, instead of making proper BlitzMax modules which can be cross-platform?
DLL with your fries?
Miscellaneous Forums/General Discussion/DLL with your fries? Get a PC is my advice to you ; )
But seriously - it's up to the Mac Max community to fill in the Mac functionality - or even come up with DLLs (is that what they're called on Mac?) the PC crowd don't have.
But seriously - it's up to the Mac Max community to fill in the Mac functionality - or even come up with DLLs (is that what they're called on Mac?) the PC crowd don't have.
Yup, it's up to the Mac and Linux crew to expand existing PC dll's to be cross-platform. :)
They dont have DLL's on the Mac. It's a window's thing.
I could be wrong (since I rarely mess with DLLs for Blitz), but isn't it the case that many of those DLLs are using Windows API/system calls? If so, they wouldn't be cross-platform as modules either.
Isn't there some way to implement the same functionality, as a module, rather than having to do it with a DLL? Isn't there a way for BlitzMax to access the api without needing these o/s dependent DLL files?
Your really missing out. PC's rock and windows does to, I can't wait for Vista to come out. The only way is if you built a reader for the DLL's, something that can read the compiled code....... good luck with that.
Point out whatever mods/functionality you want for Linux and I can have a go at porting them.
Don't have a Mac yet tho.
Don't have a Mac yet tho.
AD, you're absolutely correct. Anyone creating a new DLL for a Max module is a turdburger. The original code (presuming it was C) could just as easily be compiled as an object file and linked to a module using compiler directives. At least then one could expand on the module with other platform compiler directives.
Of course, some people are limited to creating DLLs in PowerBasic or VB etc. Although it makes you wonder what they are doing that couldn't be done in Max anyway.
Macs do have a thing similar to DLLs, btw. Don't ask me what they're called though =]
Of course, some people are limited to creating DLLs in PowerBasic or VB etc. Although it makes you wonder what they are doing that couldn't be done in Max anyway.
Macs do have a thing similar to DLLs, btw. Don't ask me what they're called though =]
Mac OS is just BSD with a nice new look AFAIK. Linux doesnt have dll's but I think it uses libraries with the lib extension for stuff or sometimes with no extension at all. It also uses modules with the .ko extension but I think those are for modules compiled on a specific kernel source. I would assume Macs would be something similar. But Im no Mac expert :(
WINDOWS! WINDOWS! WINDOWS! WINDOWS!
But I don't have BlitzMax anyways...
eh eh, turdburger... thats funny.
But I don't have BlitzMax anyways...
eh eh, turdburger... thats funny.
Anyone creating a new DLL for a Max module is a turdburger.
Really! Our IndieNet DLL was created with Max in mind but since it's a portable module it can be used in all versions of Blitz, purebasic, powerbasic, darkbasic, c++, Pyton, Torque... shall I go on?. Granted, if you are not thinking of selling your DLL then do it in Max, unless you want some funky features like multithreaded operations, which you can do in Max but it's a bit of a mess.
The original code (presuming it was C) could just as easily be compiled as an object file and linked to a module using compiler directives. At least then one could expand on the module with other platform compiler directives.
The DLL was coded in Purebasic, Purebasic can compile to Win, Mac and Linux - How's that for comatibility?