Re: loadable module support

["Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>]

Bastiaan Bakker wrote:
> > Looks like glib-config lets us know how to use glib/gmodule...
> >  GMODULE_CFLAGS="`glib-config --cflags gmodule`"
> >  GMODULE_LIBS="`glib-config --libs gmodule`"
> 
> Yes, very convinient! Formally to be correct they would be '... --cflags
> glib gmodule' and '... --libs glib gmodule'.

Only if you introduce a direct dependency upon glib!  Please try to avoid this.
We have an existing infrastructure already integrated into our build environment.
Though I don't mind using gmodule to add specific functionality, I do mind
adding unnecessary dependencies on external libraries system.  (Even though
your glib use is minimal and behind an ifdef, it will lead to larger use outside
the ifdef.  And hence, use of glib is larger issue than just adding dynamic module
support.

This is not to say that an infrastructure shifts may or may not be warranted.
It's just the issue of the day.

For the "module" table, I suggest you use AVL tree implementation included in the
distribution.

Kurt