Re: [SERVER] proposal for extensions.c

• Date: Mon, 18 Mar 1996 16:53:42 PST
• From:
  Martian <wsmyth@wichita.fn.net>
• Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
• Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
• Organization: The Martian Hegemony / MidgardMOO / The EDSU Foundation
• References: <9603181658.aa26674@forney.scinc.com>

ThwartedEfforts wrote:

> Extensions, usually defined as being new builtin functions, to the MOO
> server should be distributed as a single tar file.  The tar file should contain:
> 
> 1)  a README.extension-name, telling people about the extensions.
> 2)  a file ending in .ext, which contains the C code for the extensions.
> 3)  other required header files, if necessary.
> 

This works for me (ie, I'll probly use it for my possibly-soon to be made available set), except 
the .ext suffix.

> 
> The reason I choose the .ext extension on extension files is so that you
> easily pick out which files are needed for the MOO to compile standard, and
> which files are extensions.  I've tested this on a few preprocessors, none
> seem to have a problem with non-standard extensions (well, ideally, they
> shouldn't).  Should prefixes (a la ext-foofunc.c) be used instead?

I think prefixes would be better.


 - M
	
-- 
 ____    ____  Martian
|    \  /    | wsmyth@wichita.fn.net
|  +-\\//-+  | awsmyth@mccoy.cs.twsu.edu      Martian #96675 @ LambdaMOO
|  |  \/  |  | themartian@aol.com        telnet://lambda.xerox.com:8888 
|__|artian|__| ** One more chain letter, and I react with violence. **

• [SERVER] proposal for extensions.c
• From: ThwartedEfforts <abakun@scinc.com>

• Prev: Re: [SERVER] optional verb call by server
• Next: Re: [SERVER] proposal for extensions.c
• Index: MOO-cows
• Thread: MOO-cows