From: Dan McLeran (dan.mcleran_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-10-31 12:18:33
> Why are you linking against libcmt if cellexe.lib has C runtime stuff?
> (what does cmt have that cellexe doesn't, in other words)
Yeah, the cellexe lib contains 90% of what I need but not all of it. I could
just change the cellexe, but it's not that easy. This code runs in factories
around the world 24/7 and it's kinda painful to upgrade thousands of
machines to a new code version. So, I just leave the static stuff alone as
much as humanly possible and add features via dlls.
> It sounds very strange. Is it possible to check this with another
> compiler? MSVC 6 is known to be rather, /interesting/ in it's
> interpretation of the standard, but I haven't heard much about linking
> issues. It could be a latent issue with your linking order that a change
> in the boost lib's exposed, but I can't think of any (reasonable) reason
> why they would.
Me either. I'm playing some games with linkage order just to see if it
affects the outcome. So far, the only thing I change from working to broken
is the Boost directories. It's probably an MSVC issue, I just can't seem to
work around it, yet. Unfortunately, the only compilers supported by this
version of PharLap are MSVC6 and Borland 5.5, which I have. Some of my code
will not compile under Borland as it is now, but I could make it so with
> PS: PharLap is the Real-Time Windows-API-compatible mini-kernel? It
> looks quite cool.
It's OK. I'm pretty sick of programming against Windows 95 using a compiler
from 1998, but it pays.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk