[15943] in Kerberos_V5_Development
Re: design choices for a loadable module interface
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Russ Allbery)
Tue Jun 29 20:09:07 2010
From: Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu>
To: Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams@oracle.com>
In-Reply-To: <20100630000644.GD2232@sun.com> (Will Fiveash's message of "Tue,
29 Jun 2010 19:06:44 -0500")
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 17:09:02 -0700
Message-ID: <87wrthe601.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: krbdev@mit.edu
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: krbdev-bounces@mit.edu
Will Fiveash <will.fiveash@oracle.com> writes:
> Yes, I've found searching for plugin method definitions to be a total
> pain when vtables are used and each plugin can arbitrarily name the
> method/function assigned to the vtable. It would be much easier to
> locate the various method definitions if the method/function names were
> the same across all plugins supporting that method and that was enforced
> by the plugin SPI framework.
Those of us who write plugins that support multiple Kerberos
implementations will just write stub functions to fit the MIT Kerberos
plugin ABI that call other functions anyway, so you're going to have a
similar problem with vtables or without them.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
_______________________________________________
krbdev mailing list krbdev@mit.edu
https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/krbdev
