Mail Archives: cygwin/2005/03/11/10:38:03
> > A foo.lib can be used interchangeably with a libfoo.a file. Except
Yea I did not realize that was just a convention (I was also confused
on cygwin : .so vs .dll)
> > for the well-documented and frequently repeated problems with C++
> > name mangling, and the even more repeated problems with mixing
> > the cygwin and msvcrt runtime libraries, there should be no problems
> > with using a .lib file on the gcc command line or a .a file on the
> > "cl" command line.
> ==
> You cannot intermix non-trivial C++ (and, in many cases, even C) object
> files between compilers.
> ==
>
> I'm not saying that it can't be done in some specialized circumstances,
... if it is not impossible, let's do it :)
> for some short period of time. But before long, you *will* get bitten
> by an incompatiblity. The Standard says nothing about object file formats,
> internal structures, name-mangling, stack usage, and so on. And that
But I suppose other compiler firms had access to MSVC standards didn't they ?
> nearly guarantees disaster.
Yea I experienced in a short sample those differents C++ name mangling
( http://rzr.online.fr/q/nm )
But can usage of dynamic libs workaround that ?
http://cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/dll.html#dll-build works only for C
names i guess ?
But for C++ names, I doubt GCC can write a compatible MSVC "library
stub" ( XYZ.lib that goes along XYZ.dll, not a static one : libXYZ.lib
)
Maybe runtime linking with a dll is possible ... I am investigating on this...
--
Current Obsession : http://rzr.online.fr/q/GCC
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -