[Curses] Choose curses so library at startup (4/5)

[Peter Berg Larsen]

On Sun, 30 Nov 2003, Eric Pouech wrote:

> > I would agree with you allmost any time. But (of cause there is a but) we
> > are only using functions that was standard pre waaay old and I did
> > actually spend some time looking for functions/types etc. and nothing has
> > changed. As we are not touching internal stuff, allocating structs or
> > termcap/terminfo etc. I am convinced that they are binary compatible (and
> > I ran wine with some of the oldes curses lib I could find).
>
> the point is not only at function prototype level, lost of curses
> functions are defined as macros, and this can change from implementation
> to implementation. Hence the .so / header peering and the rest...

Yes you are right. But I ask for a pratical argument for why is shouldnt
be binary compatible. The subset we are using is so small that is was
defined (syntax and sematics) mandentory for a curses library back in 95
(before linux 2.0.0). Looking at this subset in the ncurses code shows
that functions/types/structs/macroes have not changes since.