🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <749@lax.lax.pe-nelson.com> twbrown@PE-Nelson.COM (Tom W. Brown) writes:
>Currently the _only_ solution is to recompile the library (i.e. whoever
>does this must have source code) using the BC3.1 compiler to generate a
>Borland compatible version of the DLL.  This is why most 3rd party DLL's
>either come with source or ship different flavors of the DLL depending on
>which compiler is being used.
>

Correct.  This is one of the many reasons that I don't think it's a 
good idea to export a C++ interface via DLL.  The other problems are
that any distinction between public and private is lost, all member
functions are available and that any change in the size of objects or
their interfaces means that you not only have to recompile the DLL but
any clients apps as well.  This negates one of the biggest advantages
of DLLs in the first place.

If you want to implement a DLL in C++, that's great.  But you really
should just export a C language interface.


-Greg



-- 
Greg DeMichillie          Microsoft AFX         
gregde@microsoft.com      All opinions are mine, not Microsoft's