[ODE] documentation initiative

[John Miles]

> > (Even in C++, the need for COM compliance has brought a surprising
> > amount of standardization to the field.  You can usually count on
> > abstract base classes having the same vtable layout between compilers,
> > as long as there aren't any overloaded functions.)
>
> no: name mangling, for example is different between gcc and VC. this is
> one reason that the ODE binarp API is C, with C++ a interface
> implemented as a thin wrapper.
>

Name-mangling is not a factor in COM (hence, DirectX).  Only the vtable
order matters.  The client-side code can mangle its declarations any way it
likes, as long as the method addresses appear in the same order.

The Novodex C++ API works reasonably well in this respect, if you've looked
at their docs at all.

(Caveat: I haven't actually *tried* accessing DirectX COM objects in
compilers other than MSVC, but it's hard to see why it wouldn't work.)

> > You want to leave the Windows build(s) up to someone who knows the
> > Windows platform and the conditions under which the Windows library
> > will be used.
>
> are you volunteering?

(everybody else takes one step back)

I'd like to very much, but it's more than I can take on right now.  I always
have plenty of time to bellyache from the sidelines, though. :-)

That being said, I don't mind maintaining my current Win32 DLL build,
complete with Opcode, at http://thegleam.com/ode39/ode39_win32.zip, for any
and all interested parties.  It's been helpful to a few other people.  As
long as I'm actively developing with ODE, I'll be glad to keep this
distribution up to date.

-- jm