Re: [Boost-users] Linker error with boost_1_36_0

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Linker error with boost_1_36_0
From: DDBeatty_at_[hidden]
Date: 2008-10-10 13:39:30

Why is a static library a better option than a dynamic link library in most
cases?

As a Windows developer (don't enjoy labelling myself that way but it is
true) I have always been partial to DLL's.  And I think that the "default"
behavior a Windows developer expects is DLL's at least it is for me.

My current opinion is that BOOST_ALL_DYN_LINK should be mentioned in the
"Getting Started on Windows" documentation.

Thanks,

Doug Beatty

                                                                           
             Adam Merz                                                     
             <adammerz_at_hotmail                                             
             .com>                                                      To 
             Sent by:                  boost-users_at_[hidden]         
             boost-users-bounc                                          cc 
             es_at_lists.boost.or                                             
             g                                                     Subject 
                                       Re: [Boost-users] Linker error with 
                                       boost_1_36_0                        
             10/10/2008 11:02                                              
             AM                                                            
                                                                           
                                                                           
             Please respond to                                             
             boost-users_at_lists                                             
                .boost.org                                                 
                                                                           
                                                                           

DDBeatty writes:
> Adding the following define to your preprocessor definitions should take
> care of the problem:
>
> BOOST_ALL_DYN_LINK
>
> This should probably be mentioned in the getting started documentation.
I
> spent nearly a day on this recently.
>

It's worth mentioning that the reason this is necessary is because by
default
only shared libraries are built, but by default static libraries are
autolinked.
So an alternative to the above preprocessor definition (and the better
option in
most cases, IMO) is to build static boost libs (either invoke bjam with
--build-type=complete or with link=static).

_______________________________________________
Boost-users mailing list
Boost-users_at_[hidden]
http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users

-----------------------------------------
This e-mail and any attachments are intended only for the
individual or company to which it is addressed and may contain
information which is privileged, confidential and prohibited from
disclosure or unauthorized use under applicable law.  If you are
not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified
that any use, dissemination, or copying of this e-mail or the
information contained in this e-mail is strictly prohibited by the
sender.  If you have received this transmission in error, please
return the material received to the sender and delete all copies
from your system.