On 05/23/2011 08:42 PM, Sanatan Rai wrote:
> On 23 May 2011 17:46, Michael Hertling wrote:
>> In summary, this whole issue is not related to C++ or even to CMake,
>> but to the manner static libraries are handled: The linker - at least
>> the GNU one - picks out entire object files, or drops them
Sanatan Rai wrote:
> Unfortunately, I am stuck with the paradigm of having to kludge loading an
> entire library. For various reasons the one may not have a reference to
> the hosted object in main, which must remain agnostic. Indeed, in my
> particular line of business (finance), this happens to
On 23 May 2011 17:46, Michael Hertling wrote:
> On 05/23/2011 05:09 PM, Sanatan Rai wrote:
>> On 23 May 2011 16:00, Michael Wild wrote:
>>> Everything that relies on static/global initialization to register
>>> factories is an implicit scheme. An explicit scheme is where the
>>> dependent code (e
On 05/23/2011 05:09 PM, Sanatan Rai wrote:
> On 23 May 2011 16:00, Michael Wild wrote:
>> Everything that relies on static/global initialization to register
>> factories is an implicit scheme. An explicit scheme is where the
>> dependent code (e.g. the main() function) calls a function to do the
>
On 05/23/2011 05:09 PM, Sanatan Rai wrote:
> On 23 May 2011 16:00, Michael Wild wrote:
>> Everything that relies on static/global initialization to register
>> factories is an implicit scheme. An explicit scheme is where the
>> dependent code (e.g. the main() function) calls a function to do the
>
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Sanatan Rai wrote:
> On 23 May 2011 15:11, Michael Wild wrote:
> >>> Yes, but you are registering the concrete factories implicitly instead
> >>> of explicitly, which is causing you the trouble you experience.
> >>>
> >>> Better have your user provide a function
On May 23, 2011, at 11:09 AM, Sanatan Rai wrote:
> On 23 May 2011 16:00, Michael Wild wrote:
>> Everything that relies on static/global initialization to register
>> factories is an implicit scheme. An explicit scheme is where the
>> dependent code (e.g. the main() function) calls a function to
On 23 May 2011 16:00, Michael Wild wrote:
> Everything that relies on static/global initialization to register
> factories is an implicit scheme. An explicit scheme is where the
> dependent code (e.g. the main() function) calls a function to do the
> registration.
Ok, got you. However, would t
On 05/23/2011 04:51 PM, Sanatan Rai wrote:
> On 23 May 2011 15:11, Michael Wild wrote:
Yes, but you are registering the concrete factories implicitly instead
of explicitly, which is causing you the trouble you experience.
Better have your user provide a function registering his
On 23 May 2011 15:11, Michael Wild wrote:
>>> Yes, but you are registering the concrete factories implicitly instead
>>> of explicitly, which is causing you the trouble you experience.
>>>
>>> Better have your user provide a function registering his/her classes
>>> explicitly.
>>
>> I guess this i
>-Original Message-
>From: cmake-boun...@cmake.org [mailto:cmake-boun...@cmake.org] On
Behalf Of Michael Wild
>Sent: Monday, May 23, 2011 9:12 AM
>To: cmake@cmake.org
>Subject: Re: [CMake] Newbie question: Static linking
>
>On 05/23/2011 03:25 PM, Sanatan Rai wrote:
&g
On 05/23/2011 04:40 PM, aaron.mead...@thomsonreuters.com wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: cmake-boun...@cmake.org [mailto:cmake-boun...@cmake.org] On
> Behalf Of Michael Wild
>> Sent: Monday, May 23, 2011 9:12 AM
>> To: cmake@cmake.org
>> Subject: Re
On May 23, 2011, at 10:11 AM, Michael Wild wrote:
> On 05/23/2011 03:25 PM, Sanatan Rai wrote:
>> On 23 May 2011 13:38, Michael Wild wrote:
>>> On 05/23/2011 02:20 PM, Sanatan Rai wrote:
On 23 May 2011 12:54, Michael Jackson wrote:
> You might want to take a look at the Factory design p
On 05/23/2011 03:25 PM, Sanatan Rai wrote:
> On 23 May 2011 13:38, Michael Wild wrote:
>> On 05/23/2011 02:20 PM, Sanatan Rai wrote:
>>> On 23 May 2011 12:54, Michael Jackson wrote:
You might want to take a look at the Factory design pattern.
>>>
>>> That's exactly what I use...
>>>
>>>
On 23 May 2011 13:38, Michael Wild wrote:
> On 05/23/2011 02:20 PM, Sanatan Rai wrote:
>> On 23 May 2011 12:54, Michael Jackson wrote:
>>> You might want to take a look at the Factory design pattern.
>>>
>>
>> That's exactly what I use...
>>
>> --Sanatan
>
> Yes, but you are registering the concr
On 05/23/2011 02:20 PM, Sanatan Rai wrote:
> On 23 May 2011 12:54, Michael Jackson wrote:
>> You might want to take a look at the Factory design pattern.
>>
>
> That's exactly what I use...
>
> --Sanatan
Yes, but you are registering the concrete factories implicitly instead
of explicitly, which
On 23 May 2011 12:54, Michael Jackson wrote:
> You might want to take a look at the Factory design pattern.
>
That's exactly what I use...
--Sanatan
___
Powered by www.kitware.com
Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
http://www.kitware.com/ope
You might want to take a look at the Factory design pattern.
-
Mike Jackson www.bluequartz.net
Principal Software Engineer mike.jack...@bluequartz.net
BlueQuartz Software Dayton, Ohio
Sent from my mobile device.
On May 23, 2011, at 5:51, Sanatan Rai wr
On 23 May 2011 10:18, Michael Wild wrote:
> On 05/23/2011 10:23 AM, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
>> Zitat von Sanatan Rai :
>>> The `global initialisation' stuff is just the following pattern:
>>>
>>> namespace {
>>> helper1 *helper1Creator()
>>> {
>>> return (new helper1());
>>> }
>>> const
On 05/23/2011 10:23 AM, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> Zitat von Sanatan Rai :
>> The `global initialisation' stuff is just the following pattern:
>>
>> namespace {
>> helper1 *helper1Creator()
>> {
>> return (new helper1());
>> }
>> const bool helper1Registered = factory::instance().register
Zitat von Sanatan Rai :
The `global initialisation' stuff is just the following pattern:
namespace {
helper1 *helper1Creator()
{
return (new helper1());
}
const bool helper1Registered = factory::instance().registerhelper
("helper1", helper1Creator);
}
So when I put the helpers i
On 23 May 2011 00:53, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> Am Montag, 23. Mai 2011, 01:36:14 schrieb Sanatan Rai:
>> After cmake, and make all, the libraries build as static archives, ie I get
>> liblib1.a, liblib2.a, libhelper1.a, libhelper2.a and executable myProj in
>> the appropriate locations. However, t
Am Montag, 23. Mai 2011, 01:36:14 schrieb Sanatan Rai:
> After cmake, and make all, the libraries build as static archives, ie I get
> liblib1.a, liblib2.a, libhelper1.a, libhelper2.a and executable myProj in
> the appropriate locations. However, the executable myProj does not appear
> to have link
Hi folks,
This has probably been done to death before, so apologies
in advance.
I have a project wherein I want all the project libraries to be linked
statically to the final executables.
I certainly get static libraries when I run make, however, two of
the libraries don't seem to link s
24 matches
Mail list logo
