Quote:
Originally Posted by Groucho2004
Might be a bad idea. Take for example the RemoveGrain package. It has several DLLs, each built with different optimizations (SSE, SSE2, etc.). They are named "RemoveGrainSSE.dll", "RemoveGrainSSE2.dll", you get the idea. Yet, they all have the same name in AvisynthPluginInit. I bet that 3 out of 4 users dump the lot in their autoload directory.
|
Yes, in this case they'd be "recognized" as separate plugins. But even if Avs+ could tell that they are different versions of the same plugin, it still wouldn't be able to decide which one to load (for that it'd neeed some mechanism to determine the used optimizations in a binary, which is not really feasable). So the choice of a different basename wouldn't really help here anyway, AFAICT. The problem is really that RemoveGrain doesn't use dynamic dispatching of routines based on the current machine's instruction set.