[ODE] On the meaning of ODE stability (was some quick notes on 0; 6) ...

Jason Perkins starkos at gmail.com
Fri Jun 23 05:29:25 MST 2006

On 6/22/06, Terry L. Triplett <c0d3g33k at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm in the unenviable position of supporting a binding to ODE from a higher
> level language (C# via P/Invoke) where static binding at compile time is
> *not an option*.  Since binding happens at runtime, a shared library is the
> only reasonable option.  The shared library needs to have a clearly
> identifiable version so that in the context of the wider system environment,
> the correct library is chosen, should an ambiguity exist.

I am also working on a .NET project that uses ODE. But I don't rely on
a system library; I build my own version of ODE and put it in the same
directory as my application. So far, I haven't seen any problems.

I think that there is some value in setting up a proper soname -- that
is part of the "official" Linux build process after all -- but I think
it is a low priority compared to the other stuff Rodrigo has going
right now. I'll keep an open mind of the ode-single/ode-double naming
scheme, and I actively support the decorated API calls.

> (In my darker moments, I think that a wrapper to ODE is a foolish
> undertaking.  A 'native' C# physics library makes much more sense in the
> long term.  Any takers?  I'm willing to give it a go ...)

Yikes. Yes, that would make my life a lot easier, as ODE is the only
unmanaged library I have to deal with at this point. But...I


More information about the ODE mailing list