From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-10-22 13:02:18
Rene Rivera <grafik666_at_[hidden]> writes:
> [2002-10-22] Patrick Frants wrote:
> >Rene Rivera <grafik666_at_[hidden]> wrote in
> >> A few things...
> Understood ;-)
> >> 3. Given that you are attempting to link large numbers of object files
> >> directly (as I understand your original problems), why not use an
> >> object archive to collect some of those files? "lib" in Boost.Build
> >> terms.
> >And that is not possible unless some empty(?) initialization is called
> >the object files that reside within libraries...
> If you really want to prevent relying on implementation defined behaviour,
> which is what you are doing, there is a rather easy (relatively speaking)
> way around the problem...
> 1. Take all your source code and preprocess it.
> 2. Concatenate all the preprocessed code together.
> 3. And compile that directly into a single object file that is the
That hardly eliminates implementation-defined behavior, though. If you
really want to eliminate implementation-defined behavior, switch to
Java... and be prepared for a lot more implementation-specific
behavior which vendors are _not_ required to define.
-- David Abrahams dave_at_[hidden] * http://www.boost-consulting.com Building C/C++ Extensions for Python: Dec 9-11, Austin, TX http://www.enthought.com/training/building_extensions.html
Boost-Build list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk