Registering DLL's

Alexandre Julliard julliard at
Thu Jan 9 11:06:25 CST 2003

"John K. Hohm" <jhohm at> writes:

> The main reason I used a static list was to make it impossible to forget to 
> unregister one of the interfaces you registered; that is why the unregister 
> functions take the entire structures (but only need the first members).
> OTOH, if we might someday want to avoid unregistering one or more interfaces
> or classes we registered, having separate functions would make that easier.
> I think I still prefer the structures, but are you convinced enough?

Not really, but I don't feel strongly about it, so do it the way you

> What would it take to make a static library work for this?  Unlike a dll,
> that would not have any overhead, would it?  I'm a real sucker for elegance,
> you know. :-)

It's possible, but it adds quite a bit of complexity to the build
process, and creates annoying dll dependencies. I'd prefer that we
start with the duplication for now, and see how ugly it gets.

Alexandre Julliard
julliard at

More information about the wine-devel mailing list