Re: [boost] [config] Changes to reflect Visual C++ "15" preview 5

Subject: Re: [boost] [config] Changes to reflect Visual C++ "15" preview 5
From: Billy O'Neal (VC LIBS) (bion_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-10-12 13:31:56

>Is static preferred over app-local? I thought it was the other way around.

Static is preferred if it works for you. Unfortunately there are circumstances where you can't tolerate multiple CRTs in the same process because you need some global state to be synchronized, and in such cases the only option is to use the DLL.

>Windows Update?

Windows Update deploys the UCRT, and you just said that wasn't OK for you :)

Billy3
________________________________
From: Boost <boost-bounces_at_[hidden]> on behalf of Olaf van der Spek <ml_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2016 12:09:01 AM
To: boost_at_[hidden]
Subject: Re: [boost] [config] Changes to reflect Visual C++ "15" preview 5

On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 9:36 PM, Billy O'Neal (VC LIBS)
<bion_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>Don't kill stuff, offer users a better way to do it instead.
>
>
> We're open to suggestions :). We've been saying the "better way" is the redist, or static linking, for years.

Is static preferred over app-local? I thought it was the other way around.

>
>>Of course, that'd have to work on W7 as well, not just W10.
>
>
> Even if the redist was bundled with the OS that still wouldn't help here, because Win7 shipped ~6 years before VS2015 :). Time machines and all that.

Windows Update?

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.boost.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo.cgi%2Fboost&data=01%7C01%7Cbion%40microsoft.com%7C517f6681051047593efb08d3f26eb001%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1&sdata=X3TcMjrzlHxuWTqbsKq0OFJdzhpPjdaZlXYQefl3EPo%3D&reserved=0