I'm sure this has been well covered, but I still have to ask

Is there a reason why DMC++ cannot work with and without the _ & @ parts of exported DLL functions? Borland, GnuC, Intel, Metrowerks and VC++ all can, so it's not just my wishing to emulate a Microsoft-ism (or if it is, some worthy folks have trodden this path before).

It was a royal pita to have to spawn a second .DEF file for a recent port, but I can live with that. What's more of a pain is keeping them in sync. (Yes, I know I could make them all have the _ & @ forms, but that's just ugly and tiresome to maintain - i.e. one has to trawl the source to find out the number of arg bytes, which the compiler already knows.)

Flame away ...

Matthew

> I'm sure this has been well covered, but I still have to ask

> Is there a reason why DMC++ cannot work with and without the _ & @ parts of exported DLL functions? Borland, GnuC, Intel, Metrowerks and VC++ all can, so it's not just my wishing to emulate a Microsoft-ism (or if it is, some worthy folks have trodden this path before).
[..]
Borland cannot really cope with that. It simply creates an alias entry (since
C++ Builder 5's implib) in the LIB file. Maybe you can use Borlands C++
Builder's implib?

Regards,
Mark Junker

"Matthew Wilson" <matthew@stlsoft.org> wrote in message news:bcdftf$1o69$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> I'm sure this has been well covered, but I still have to ask
>
> Is there a reason why DMC++ cannot work with and without the _ & @ parts
of
> exported DLL functions? Borland, GnuC, Intel, Metrowerks and VC++ all can, so it's not just my wishing to emulate a Microsoft-ism (or if it is, some worthy folks have trodden this path before).
>
> It was a royal pita to have to spawn a second .DEF file for a recent port, but I can live with that. What's more of a pain is keeping them in sync. (Yes, I know I could make them all have the _ & @ forms, but that's just ugly and tiresome to maintain - i.e. one has to trawl the source to find
out
> the number of arg bytes, which the compiler already knows.)
>
> Flame away ...

The fundamental problem is Microsoft started the practice of stripping the suffix off of the system DLL's. There's no way to add on the missing information automatically.

Matthew Wilson wrote:

> I'm sure this has been well covered, but I still have to ask
>
> Is there a reason why DMC++ cannot work with and without the _ & @ parts of exported DLL functions? Borland, GnuC, Intel, Metrowerks and VC++ all can, so it's not just my wishing to emulate a Microsoft-ism (or if it is, some worthy folks have trodden this path before).
>
> It was a royal pita to have to spawn a second .DEF file for a recent port, but I can live with that. What's more of a pain is keeping them in sync. (Yes, I know I could make them all have the _ & @ forms, but that's just ugly and tiresome to maintain - i.e. one has to trawl the source to find out the number of arg bytes, which the compiler already knows.)
>
> Flame away ...

Does this help at all?

http://www.digitalmars.com/~jan/

--
ManiaC++
Jan Knepper

It may well do. Looks nice.

I'll check it out. :)

"Jan Knepper" <jan@smartsoft.us> wrote in message news:3EF1B8B6.E93CA09C@smartsoft.us...
> Matthew Wilson wrote:
>
> > I'm sure this has been well covered, but I still have to ask
> >
> > Is there a reason why DMC++ cannot work with and without the _ & @ parts
of
> > exported DLL functions? Borland, GnuC, Intel, Metrowerks and VC++ all
can,
> > so it's not just my wishing to emulate a Microsoft-ism (or if it is,
some
> > worthy folks have trodden this path before).
> >
> > It was a royal pita to have to spawn a second .DEF file for a recent
port,
> > but I can live with that. What's more of a pain is keeping them in sync. (Yes, I know I could make them all have the _ & @ forms, but that's just ugly and tiresome to maintain - i.e. one has to trawl the source to find
out
> > the number of arg bytes, which the compiler already knows.)
> >
> > Flame away ...
>
> Does this help at all?
>
> http://www.digitalmars.com/~jan/
>
> --
> ManiaC++
> Jan Knepper
>
>

Wouldn't it be nice to have a newsgroup dedicated to helpful Auxiliary Tools Links like that?  BTW I see nobody is using the .atl newsgroup.  :o)

In article <3EF1B8B6.E93CA09C@smartsoft.us>, Jan Knepper says...
>
>Matthew Wilson wrote:
>
>> I'm sure this has been well covered, but I still have to ask
>>
>> Is there a reason why DMC++ cannot work with and without the _ & @ parts of exported DLL functions? Borland, GnuC, Intel, Metrowerks and VC++ all can, so it's not just my wishing to emulate a Microsoft-ism (or if it is, some worthy folks have trodden this path before).
>>
>> It was a royal pita to have to spawn a second .DEF file for a recent port, but I can live with that. What's more of a pain is keeping them in sync. (Yes, I know I could make them all have the _ & @ forms, but that's just ugly and tiresome to maintain - i.e. one has to trawl the source to find out the number of arg bytes, which the compiler already knows.)
>>
>> Flame away ...
>
>Does this help at all?
>
>http://www.digitalmars.com/~jan/
>
>--
>ManiaC++
>Jan Knepper
>
>