Re: naming convention of targets for Windows platform - why not use VC style?
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 17:05:31 -0500
>> I noticed there are no MD(d), MT(d) suffixes at the end of targets' names
>> neither in Makefile.vc* makefiles nor in the VC project file curllib.vcproj.
>> Do you avoid this VC naming convention by any purpose?
> I think nobody of those who added the targets in the first place was aware
> of any such naming convention and then the rest of the targets were added to
> following the existing convention.
> If you ask me, we need to get something other to fix this
> windows-build-hell. Adding 2041 different makefile targets for all sorts of
> build config combinations doesn't feel sane. But then there's no
> "configure"-like standard tool or so for Windows so I don't really know what
> this other and better way would involve! :-/
I don't think there's much choice. This is the tactic that both OpenSSL
and Boost take, for example, generating 6 or 8 different outputs for the
various permutations (static vs. shared, debug vs. release, single vs.
I don't know how much I'd call it a convention, but there is
precedence. Of course,
they do use different naming schemes...
Received on 2009-02-17