Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > Peter Kümmel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > | > Georg Baum wrote: > | >> Am Montag, 4. September 2006 22:48 schrieb Peter Kümmel: > | >>> Georg Baum wrote: > | >>>> Why are circular dependencies a problem? It is a long time ago, but > | >> IIRC I > | >>>> created dlls with circular dependencies during my diplom thesis. > | >>>> > | >>>> > | >>>> Georg > | >>>> > | >>>> > | >>> Yes, but this needs a two pass build process, which looks more > | >>> like a hack than a good solution. > | >>> And isn't a circular dependency an indicator for an imperfect design? > | >> > | >> Depends. In my case there was some circularity in the problem itself > | >> (could even lead to infinite loops if not correctly used), so it made > | >> sense. In the case of LyX I think that it simply is a mix of different > | >> designs (frontend as library vs. kernel as library). > | > > | > That's exactly the problem indeed. My earlier cleanup work is heading > | > toward "the frontend use the kernel as a library" design. Once this is > | > achieved, splitting out the toolkit specific frontend should be easy. So > | > clearly the first candidate for a new dll is the code in frontend/qt4/. > | > | I have started with frontend/qt4/ but give up because qt4 needs several > | functions from the other libs. > | We must start at the bottom not at the top, and qt4 is at the top. > > What platform are you trying to do this on? > >
Windows, and I've not tried to link against the executable. -- Peter Kümmel
