Knowing the missing DLL name is useless too IMO. Sure, it is/was useful to
Proper deployment is our responsibility, not the end-user's. That's
In article <uyfXfd8#HHA.1164@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl>,
Ben Voigt [C++ MVP] <rbv@nospam.nospam> wrote:
That's the primary reason why I call the current implementation of
manifests half-baked -- when they fail, they fail with *no* *useful*
*information*. That's not a robust solution for real world use.
That's actually true of DLL dependencies in general, not only
manifests. There's no reason in the world the message couldn't say
"yourlib.dll failed to load because msvcrt80.dll could not be
found."
Regular DLL dependencies at least report *what* it wants, but
manifests are less useful -- they report nothing to the consumer
pointing out the actual problem. If, as you claim, manifests could
report the missing DLL, why doesn't it? Actual error handling, useful
reporting is the last things that tend to get added to a system,
because it's seen as grunt work. But, it's required to really move
from the "half-baked" to the "actually usable" stage.
Nathan Mates
--
<*> Nathan Mates - personal webpage http://www.visi.com/~nathan/
# Programmer at Pandemic Studios -- http://www.pandemicstudios.com/
# NOT speaking for Pandemic Studios. "Care not what the neighbors
# think. What are the facts, and to how many decimal places?" -R.A.
Heinlein