On 16 Aug 2014 at 12:12, Antony Polukhin wrote:
Let's take a look at the situation from a bigger distance. There are 3-5 known open source plugin libraries based or proposed for Boost. There are hundredths plugin systems in commercial products. All those plugins have a common part - shared_library class. Other parts differ a lot: * factory methods signatures * plugin api * plugin names * event loops * OS specific techlologoies support (COM)
Almost all of those differences can not be unified/solved in a common way. Any solution would not be generic enough. That's why Plugin library does not force any plugin API or does not specify event loops. It just stopped at the point where the differences begin.
Oh I totally understand, absolutely. I think where you stopped is just about right. Your design is good too.
Answering to all the naming proposals: SharedLibray/DLL/DynamicLinkLibrary sound too platform specific. Plugin sounds more generic, thou it confuses users. How about Dynamic Library Load and namespace boost::dll:: ?
I wonder if Microsoft have trademarked "DLL"? :) If not, that works for me. Niall -- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/