Re: Pointers and DLLs/shared libraries
- From: Steve Lionel <steve.lionel@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 10:40:25 -0800 (PST)
On Nov 28, 12:31 pm, "James Van Buskirk" <not_va...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
"Steve Lionel" <steve.lio...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:8d1c1e44-10fa-42b5-9aff-f655025ed737@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Each time you run the program, you get a fresh, initial copy of the
DLL's data, both read-only and read-write. It is exactly as if you
had used a static library.
How about per thread?
Again, same as using a static library. Threads share the executing
program's address space, including DLLs. If you have writeable
storage in a DLL you must protect it against multithread access the
same as you would any global storage in the program.
Steve
.
- References:
- Pointers and DLLs/shared libraries
- From: Arjen Markus
- Re: Pointers and DLLs/shared libraries
- From: Craig Powers
- Re: Pointers and DLLs/shared libraries
- From: Steve Lionel
- Re: Pointers and DLLs/shared libraries
- From: James Van Buskirk
- Pointers and DLLs/shared libraries
- Prev by Date: initializing an array of user-defined data types
- Next by Date: Re: initializing an array of user-defined data types
- Previous by thread: Re: Pointers and DLLs/shared libraries
- Next by thread: (Yet another) EQUIVALENCE problem in modules and common blocks
- Index(es):