From: Daniel James (daniel_james_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-03-03 10:15:29
On 3/3/06, Vladimir Prus <ghost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Hmm.. I'm a bit concerned over this. AFAICT, the compiler fails a large number
> of tests (pretty much every library fails),
A lot of those failures are because Boost.Test doesn't work on the
compiler. And little or no effort has been put into getting most
libraries working on it.
> and now it turns out the free
> version can't create DLL. Is it worth to invest time in this compiler?
It can create a DLL, the missing file is from STLport (I think..) and
building STLport on it is a real pain. I'll probably get it working
eventually. I think it's fairly typical for the free versions of
compilers not to contain everything - the free version of Visual C++
is missing something (I forget what, but I remember having problems
running my tests on it).
> I've applied this patch. It still feels very strange to me that in order to
> create a DLL one needs a .def file :-(
You can use the dmc executable to do the linking - which creates the
.def file for you. I don't know if all the linking options are
available. I assume there's some reason that the toolkit isn't using
it, but it'd probably be easier to use.
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