Further on MEX

[Aravindh Krishnamoorthy]

Dear,

It was quite embarrassing to find that the MEX issue pointed out in
the earlier mail (octave-bugs) were fixed about six months ago on the
development archive.
Unrelated, here are some specific questions related to the MEX support:

1. [source-code] There are two lists for maintaining shared libraries:
src/dynamic-ld.cc: octave_shlib_list, octave_mex_file_list, while one
would have sufficed. This one (single list, if it existed) could be
extended to support Matlab styled 'loadlibrary', etc. functions. Why
are two lists maintained?

2. [feature-req] What is the take on supporting 'mexext' extensions
(mexw32 for Win32, mexglx for Linux32, etc.) ?

3. [feature-req] What is the take on supporting 'loadlibrary', etc
functions in Octave?

Also on a related note:
4. [matter-of-taste] I'd have liked a liboctavemex.so (with mx... MEX
functions) released under LGPL, but I'm not sure how strong supporters
of software-freedom and GPL the Octave team is. Would you pls. comment
on this?

Based on your response, I'd like to take up items 1-4 above.

Yours sincerely,
Aravindh Krishnamoorthy