Re: [pcre-dev] [Mingw-users] pcre

On Wed, Apr 04, 2007 at 11:38:49AM -0400, Sheri wrote:
> Bob Rossi wrote:
> >On Wed, Apr 04, 2007 at 11:21:21AM -0400, Sheri wrote:
> >
> >>Bob Rossi wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Wed, Apr 04, 2007 at 09:58:37AM -0400, Sheri wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Bob Rossi wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>Not to trivialize things on your end. But it seems to me that have
> >>>multiple dll's is a very simple solution, that allows some people to
> >>>have a small set of the pcre functionality, or a large set. I think it
> >>>makes sense to do things this way.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>I'm hate to have to tell you this, but the posix api depends entirely on
> >>the native api.
> >>
> >
> >Yes, I understand. I don't use the posix functionality at all.
> >
> >
> >>>Why would having multiple dll's make your installation harder? You would
> >>>only need to pass along a few more dll's, wouldn't you?
> >>>
> >>>Bob Rossi
> >>>
> >>>
> >>None of that is under my control. I'm the *user* of regular expressions,
> >>I (usually) like to be on the bleeding edge with new features (like
> >>"any" newline).
> >>
> >>The exe is written by a third party (not the guy enhancing the regex
> >>plugin). The exe author supports installing pcre.dll parallel to his
> >>exe. The application and all its plugins is self contained. Currently
> >>deleting that removes the application entirely.
> >>
> >
> >Well, I'm assumming there is going to be work on his part anyways, to
> >get it working with pcre-7.1. I mean, we currently build 3 dll's and the
> >names are different than what they used to be.
> >
> >Bob Rossi
> >
> >
> The exe author is not involve at all with the plugin enhancement project
> underway. We hoped to be able to give him updated files to replace the
> ones in his current distribution. The exe and plugins are freeware btw,
> it's PowerPro.
>
> I suppose we could stick with 7.0 if necessary, we'll just shift away
> from "any" newline as our dll default. Depending on what Alan finds with
> new style dlls.

Please keep this on the mailing list, as the final decision as to what
happens is absolutely not up to me.

I'm in no way trying to make your life difficult. I feel the pain of
change often myself. I'm suggesting that I think this is a good change.
It appears that you are going to have 2 problems,
- The dll name has changed (does this effect your plugin architecture)
- You know require 2 dll's instead of one.
Please describe exactly how this makes your life complicated. If the
problem is simply distributing a new dll, I'm not sure I really see that
as an issue.

Thanks,
Bob Rossi