Re: Yet another reason to crash with multiple Lua runtime?

[Ross Berteig <Ross@...>]

On 7/16/2008, Shmuel Zeigerman wrote:
> Ross Berteig wrote:
> > I would much rather see someone cleverer than I figure out 
> how to do the
> > magical forward to the statically linked core.
>
> Isn't this what you're talking about?
>    http://lua-users.org/wiki/LuaProxyDll

Yes, that is exactly what I meant. Now if we can just convince 
all the vendors that include an embedded Lua core in their 
products to provide access to that proxy (along with access to 
require() and module() of course) to their third-party script 
environments then it would be possible to use many of the 
readily available binary modules. Personally, I'm wishing for 
Adobe Lightroom to permit require(), but I'm certain there are 
plenty of other use cases.

Even better would be to work out how to give Windows the 
impression that the DLL had been loaded in the running process 
without having to actually have the file be present.... I know 
I've seen some code injection tricks that work kind of like 
that, and at least one utility that temporarily installs a 
device driver at runtime from a single, monolithic EXE file, so 
it should be possible.

The same technique should be possible to use to get a single 
copy of other supporting DLLs such as libzip, libtiff, and the like.

Ross Berteig                               Ross@CheshireEng.com
Cheshire Engineering Corp.           http://www.CheshireEng.com/