From: Roland (roland.schwarz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-12-17 08:47:04
(Michael Glassford <glassfordm_at_[hidden]>) wrote:
> Also, note that Roland's message that I was replying to was referring to
> a previous posting of his in which he presented a technique for getting
> the benefits of a dynamically linked library while statically linking it
> (basically, by using the unusual technique of creating a small dll at
Yes, this is exactly the idea.
> If it worked out (and I can see reasons, technical and
> otherwise, why it might not), this would allow a statically linked
> version without removing any features.
I intended my example as a starting point for discussion. I know that there
are some things that will need more consideration. Robustness of temporary
file path, possible race conditions, (or speed?) to name a few that come to mind.
Also issues of putting the stub file compilation into bjam build is not yet obvious
I am very interested in your reasons,
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk