Re: SharedCLibrary version

In message <4dcd7b9865john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
John Cartmell <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> In article <ad1473cd4d.james@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, James Pea***
> <news@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> John Cartmell wrote:
>
>> > Using:
>> >
>> > RMEnsure SharedCLibrary 5.17 RMLoad System:Modules.CLib RMEnsure
>> > SharedCLibrary 5.34 Error This application requires SharedCLibrary 5.34
>> > or later
>
>> > causes problems for 32-bit machines that don't happen to be an Iyonix
>
>> It is not that simple. The guard could be there for a very good reason.
>
> Of course. I was pointing out that including it automatically isn't
> without problems.

It is without problems. Problems only arise if someone removes them.
There *is* a choice but it is not a choice of including or not
including these RMEnsure lines. If someone wants to ensure that the
software runs on all platforms including non-Iyonix 32-bit systems,
then the only possible way is to use StubsG, which will not require
any RMEnsures (as pointed out in Steve's message).

If however a programmer, for whatever reason, decides not to use
StubsG and chooses the default option offered by the development
tools, which is to link against the standard stubs, then he *has* to
use the above RMEnsures and this does not cause any problems, it only
prevents the software from running on a platform that might (or might
not) be able to run it. It is up to each programmer to decide which
platforms he wants to support. While it is a reasonable thing to
assume that programmers will usually want to make their software
available to as wide an audience as possible that still does not mean
that you can tell them to do so.

Martin
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin Wuerthner MW Software http://www.mw-software.com/
ArtWorks 2 -- Designing stunning graphics has never been easier
spamtrap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [replace "spamtrap" by "info" to reply]
.