Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


#ActualBornToCode

Posted 10 January 2013 - 02:00 AM

Another solution is to just ignore it and build different libraries for different implementations, so use msvc, gcc, clang and name your libraries after what they were compiled with. E.g. MyLibWindows64MSVC or MyLibWindows32GCC

You have to do that anyway -- the C++ ABI (e.g. name mangling) isn't portable across compilers, so a library built by one compiler very likely just wont work with another compiler, no matter how simple/complex the interface is.

 

 

Personally, if I can't get the source to a C++ library that I want to use, then I don't use it. Even if I can get a binary that was built for my compiler, maybe I'll want to switch compilers later and the library author will have disappeared, leaving me stuck.

But that is not an luxury that you always get.


#1BornToCode

Posted 10 January 2013 - 01:58 AM

Another solution is to just ignore it and build different libraries for different implementations, so use msvc, gcc, clang and name your libraries after what they were compiled with. E.g. MyLibWindows64MSVC or MyLibWindows32GCC

You have to do that anyway -- the C++ ABI (e.g. name mangling) isn't portable across compilers, so a library built by one compiler very likely just wont work with another compiler, no matter how simple/complex the interface is.

 

 

Personally, if I can't get the source to a C++ library that I want to use, then I don't use it. Even if I can get a binary that was built for my compiler, maybe I'll want to switch compilers later and the library author will have disappeared, leaving me stuck.

But that is not an luxury that you always get. a good example would be the fbx sdk for example.


PARTNERS