Re: passing a string to a dll

From:

"Tom Serface" <tom.nospam@camaswood.com>

Newsgroups:

microsoft.public.vc.mfc

Date:

Wed, 19 Sep 2007 07:26:23 -0700

Message-ID:

<uPtHFls#HHA.4612@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl>

It's just a naming convention. When we look at a file that may have been
copied elsewhere we don't have to wonder what build it was made for.
There's nothing to it other than that. We only do this with DLLs and LIBs.
For some reason (don't know why) we've never done it with EXEs.

Tom

"Joseph M. Newcomer" <newcomer@flounder.com> wrote in message
news:lfc1f3d2ct36ab7oicdgj9ldhfup8fkjbl@4ax.com...

Why? There's no reason to rename them, except in some fairly rare
circumstances, because
they cannot possibly get "confused". Release builds will use the release
version of the
DLLs from the release directories, and debug builds will use the debug
version of the DLLs
from the debug directories. Adding _d doesn't change anything, it just
adds complexity
without benefit. For an obvious beginner, it is a flat-out mistake.

The only reason MFC71D.DLL has a different name than MFC71.DLL is that
they both exist in
a single common directory, which is unusual in most development
environments; debug
modules live in debug directories, release modules live in release
directories.
joe
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 21:54:25 -0700, "Tom Serface"
<tom.nospam@camaswood.com> wrote: