It's acceptable if no additional environment variable, configuration file entry, etc. is necessary. 

I am not counting requirements imposed by external clients or languages (PYTHONPATH or Lisp packaging, etc.).

Regards,
Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: Istvan Varga 
Sent: Oct 13, 2005 2:24 PM
To: csound@lists.bath.ac.uk
Subject: Re: [Csnd] Common Music and Csound 5

Michael Gogins wrote:

> I have no objection to a separate wrapper library if, and only if:
> 
> 1. The wrappers come in the standard binary distributions
 > for Linux, Windows, and OS X.

Of course, a binary distribution would come with the wrappers,
regardless of whether they are a separate library or are statically
compiled into libcsound, as long as whoever makes the distribution
can actually build them. If having wrappers in the main library
becomes a hard requirement then a distribution that cannot provide
them is most likely to be discontinued (that includes my Win32
releases, by the way) for not being able to build it at all.
On the other hand, assuming that one can indeed build the wrappers,
then if they are a separate dynamic library, there is no reason not
to include them; with a single monolithic library that includes
everything, but wrappers are optional, it may be tempting to omit
them to make the library smaller and have fewer dependencies.

> 2. No additional configuration (on top of installing and/or building
 > Csound) is required by user to load and use the wrappers.

I am not sure what this exactly means, but is having a csound.dll
file and a csound_wrappers.dll (the name is only an example) that
links against it acceptable ?
-- 
Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email to csound-unsubscribe@lists.bath.ac.uk