Re: C++ Version 6 app using c++ version 8 dll
David Ching wrote:
"Ajay Kalra" <ajaykalra@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1176391829.460263.168600@n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
I think I used the wrong word when I used "professional". I was
looking more for "Commercial", essentially in a software shop which
has more than a handful of developers.
"Commercial" is still the wrong word. There are many more shrink wrap apps
for sale that are written by a handful of devs than those written by
hundreds of devs.
I think what you mean is "large scale development" which is just as common
in internal enterprise apps as it is in deployed apps. And this basically
is the problem for something like Visual C++ which has to cater to both the
"micro-ISV's" like me and the extremely large dev teams like yours. Guess
what? The goals are completely different! And guess what? Microsoft has
chosen to cater to you and to stop catering to me. Congratulations!
Actually, despite years of discouraging of static linking, MS has not
done any harm to it for pure native applications (thank goodness). I did
hear rumors that static linking might be discontinued in some future
version of VS, but it seems this is at least some way off.
OTOH, all the fiascoes with SxS, manifests and VS2005 SP1 have greatly
inconvenienced the dynamic linkers. I would have thought that SxS and
manifests should have made things better, but they seem to have made
things worse.
Part of the reason that "micro-ISV's" like static linking is that the
person who writes the code is often the same person that is responsible
for deployment, and for me static linking is all about deployment.
--
David Wilkinson
Visual C++ MVP