Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 16:59:24 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
To: "Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET)" <salvador AT inti DOT edu DOT ar>
cc: blizzar AT hem1 DOT passagen DOT se, djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: RHIDE Question.
In-Reply-To: <m0xLTIV-000S1fC@inti.gov.ar>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.971019165847.27221L-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk


On Wed, 15 Oct 1997, Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET) wrote:

> initialized. The other way is to check if the module is initialized in each 
> function that's called externally. The last is a good practice and normally 
> isn't slow to add:
> 
> XXXX
> { 
>  if (!initialized)
>    initialize();
> }
> 
> in the entry points. In this way you don't depend on the order of the link.

Some of the constructors might sit in libraries, and so whoever links
the program might not have any control on how they are initialized.

And besides, you asked for a scenario where the order is significant,
and I provided such a scenario, which I met in real-life programs.  I'm
sure there's half a dozen ways of working around the ordering in
RHIDE, but given that sometimes the order matters, isn't it best to
just prevent RHIDE from sorting in the first place?