10 Dec
2017
10 Dec
'17
8:43 p.m.
On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 08:37:08PM +0100, Markus Seeber wrote:
On 12/10/2017 03:31 PM, Paul Davis wrote:
So what would you write it in instead?
--
Gordonjcp
On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 5:51 AM, Markus Seeber
<
markus.seeber(a)spectralbird.de> wrote:
That is exactly the problem with plugins. At the same time I'd say:
"Don't use these GUI librarys for plugins and do not load any plugin that
exports these symbols."
and be done with it, let offensive software die. In my eyes writing a plugin GUI
in GTK/Qt is very bad practice for exactly these reasons.
Just employ static linking when sensible.
unortunately, several large toolkits of various types make this impossible
because they themselves use dynamic (runtime-driven) loading of shared
objects. GTK (and its dependency stack) is a particular offender there, but
I believe the same is true of Qt. You can't statically link against this
type of toolkit if your goal is to end up with a self-contained binary. the
g* stack has made a few improvements in this area in recent years, but
AFAIK it still isn't possible to build a self-contained binary. JUCE
differs from this, I believe.