From cstrato at aon.at  Fri Oct 16 16:47:53 2009
From: cstrato at aon.at (cstrato)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 16:47:53 +0200
Subject: [Rd] Question when compiling source code with VC++
In-Reply-To: <4AD7A4E8.1010602@stats.uwo.ca>
References: <4AD78D98.80709@aon.at> <4AD7A4E8.1010602@stats.uwo.ca>
Message-ID: <4AD88799.8070306@aon.at>

Thank you for this clarification, neither did I know that it was written 
by Brian Ripley (although now this seems to be obvious) nor that the 
advice is already 10 years old. Thus please allow me to re-phrase my 
question:

Dear Prof. Ripley:
1, Why did you propose the option "/MT" instead of option "/MD"?
2, Will the proposed settings to build the DLL still be valid for the 
upcoming Windows 7?

Best regards
Christian
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._
C.h.r.i.s.t.i.a.n   S.t.r.a.t.o.w.a
V.i.e.n.n.a           A.u.s.t.r.i.a
e.m.a.i.l:        cstrato at aon.at
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._


Duncan Murdoch wrote:
> On 15/10/2009 5:01 PM, cstrato wrote:
>> Dear Duncan,
>>
>> In your document "readme.packages.txt" you have a very helpful 
>> chapter on "Using Visual C++".
>> Please allow me to ask you one question: Why do you propose the 
>> option "/MT" instead of option "/MD"?
>> (To my knowledge usually option "/MD" is used when compiling programs 
>> with VC++.)
>
> I didn't write that: I've got no experience with VC++.  It was Brian 
> Ripley who wrote it, and the log says he wrote it in 1999.  So I'd 
> guess that it isn't bad advice (having lasted 10 years without a 
> change), but I guess it's possible that it is no longer optimal.
>
> Duncan Murdoch
>



[Rd] Question when compiling source code with VC++
cstrato