Re: [boost] Re: jam question

From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-11-05 08:02:02

OK, I'm convinced!
===================================================
  David Abrahams, C++ library designer for hire
 resume: http://users.rcn.com/abrahams/resume.html

        C++ Booster (http://www.boost.org)
          email: david.abrahams_at_[hidden]
===================================================

----- Original Message -----
From: "Markus Schoepflin" <markus.schoepflin_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 4:57 AM
Subject: [boost] Re: jam question

> --- In boost_at_y..., "David Abrahams" <david.abrahams_at_r...> wrote:
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Thomas Witt" <witt_at_i...>
> >
> > > If we have some kind of smart name deduction, shouldn't it be
> xxxx.lib
> > > on windows?
> >
> > It's hard for me to say just what it should be. Your suggestion is
> certainly
> > easy to implement, if the consensus is that it's right. Do you feel
> strongly
> > that you have hit on the right approach?
> >
> > -Dave
>
> Unix developers are used to just say -lm if they want libm.a. Windows
> developers (at least MSVC users) are used to explicitly say
> kernel32.lib or user32.lib. In other words, unix developers are used
> to smart name deduction, windows developers are not.
>
> On the other hand, if the build system supports windows and unix
> platforms, you should be able to say <find-library>foo and it works
> for unix and windows.
>
> As LINK.EXE doesn't do any file name magic when looking for a file
> (at least I couldn't find anything in the documentation) I think we
> should append the lib extension.
>
> Markus
>
>
>
> Info: http://www.boost.org  Unsubscribe:
<mailto:boost-unsubscribe_at_[hidden]>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>