>                               Be aware that dynamic linkage
  > facilities in Unix are usually considered to be a feature
  > of the compiler, not of the operating system.  This shows
  > up in EMX, which is one of the OS/2 ports of GCC, where it
  > is common for the C run-time library to be distributed as a
  > DLL instead of being linked into the EXE.

 JdBP>   Possibly a feature as far as UNIX people are concerned, but not really
 JdBP>   a noteworthy one for us OS/2 programmers, since most of the OS/2 C++
 JdBP>   compilers provide the C++ Standard Library in DLL form.

What I mean is that, in Windows or OS/2, there is a commonly understood
dividing line between where the compiler run-time stops and the operating
system begins.  You get some DLLs with the operating system, such as
DOSCALL1.DLL or MSG.DLL.  In Unix, much of the same sort of functionality
might be expected to be provided with the compiler run-time instead, and
even the internal format of DLLs may be specified differently between
compilers.  The format of the run-time library that comes with the compiler
is not so much what I was focusing on in my comment, but rather the
division of responsibility between the run-time library and the operating
system.

 JdBP>   And if anyone knows how to do so with Watcom C++, then I'd be glad to
 JdBP>   know, because I haven't found a way of putting the C++ Standard
 JdBP>   Library into a DLL with Watcom C++ yet ...

I don't know how to do that either.  I assume that, if you pay the
exorbitant amount of extra money that Watcom wants for run-time library
source, then you can make your own DLLs.  I have never raised that issue
with Watcom, although I did gripe to them at some considerable length about
charging extra for the library source in the first place.  They were
unaware that their competitors, such as Borland, are giving away the
library source for free with the basic compiler.  They also claimed not to
have considered that the added shipping cost would be nothing because they
were using CD-ROM; they said that the price for the library source was
partly based on the cost of shipping the floppies.

Finally, Watcom said that they were concerned that they would have to
support the library source when selling it as a product, and as such felt
that there were real costs to them in distributing it.  However, Watcom
does not support the library source even if you pay the $250 or whatever it
costs, so I cannot understand that reasoning.  No compiler vendor provides
"support" for the library source: they give it to you, and you
are on your own if you change it.

-- Mike


--- Maximus/2 2.02