|
I think he's looking for the lib utility. You can use this to combine object files into a static library. Its been a long time since I've created a static library for anything.
|
|
|
|
|
Nish [BusterBoy] wrote:
You cannot convert just about any obj file to lib!!!
Huh...Nish i'm missing something here...
Just about doesn't seem right...if i'm wrong correct me...if i'm right tell me too...cuz i'm gonna finally tease you about yer English. 
Out of pure jealousy (spelling) of your grammer being better than mine  of course.
Hooo...i'm getting excited...am I right...? 
Laterz!
"An expert is someone who has made all the mistakes in his or her field" - Niels Bohr
|
|
|
|
|
HockeyDude wrote:
Out of pure jealousy (spelling) of your grammer being better than mine
It's spelt "grammar" and not "grammer" 
My sentence :-
You cannot convert just about any obj file to lib!!!
This means you cannot take any random obj file and convert it to a lib file. "just about" is a phrase.
http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=just%20about
Nish
It's seven o'clock
On the dot
I'm in my drop top
Cruisin' the streets - Oh yeah
I got a real pretty, pretty little thing that's waiting for me
|
|
|
|
|
Nish [BusterBoy] wrote:
"just about" is a phrase.
Actually it's an idiom
Nish
It's seven o'clock
On the dot
I'm in my drop top
Cruisin' the streets - Oh yeah
I got a real pretty, pretty little thing that's waiting for me
|
|
|
|
|
Damn it Nish...
I'll catch you one day...
See you have the benefit (i don't really know, but i'll assume) of not learning english in quite the same setting as me. When I speak it's full of normal slang, Sooo sometimes proper grammer or pronounciation doesn't seem right to me, cuz well...it's the only language I know and I like my enlgish...not websters or whoever...Plus I speak Canadian English eh!!!
For instance...in Canada Color is Color not Colour...like I think the Brits or Americans spell it. Actually I may have that backwards... 
So yeah...ummm...thats my excuse for lack of literacy...or whatever it is...
Perhaps we should all communicate using a hybrid..??? of C++ or something...
if(Nish)
AfxMessageBox("Whats up?");
else
AfxMessageBox("Are you there..?");
This way there would be no correcting, cuz the compiler would catch your gramm(er) mistakes before sending out...?
Cheers man!
"An expert is someone who has made all the mistakes in his or her field" - Niels Bohr
|
|
|
|
|
Actually I learned english by speaking english too. In school we had to use english compulsorily. It wasn't easy doing that when you are 4 or 5 years old and you dont know the language except for that apple-ball-cat stuff the teacher shows you on the board. But then you catch up and by the time you are 8, you can speak the language well enough to insult someone's grandparents without using any explicitly abusive words.
Nish
It's seven o'clock
On the dot
I'm in my drop top
Cruisin' the streets - Oh yeah
I got a real pretty, pretty little thing that's waiting for me
|
|
|
|
|
English is pretty popular.
Yeah I insulted grandparents too, but not with English...I used the filipino I picked up from friends. They never knew what I was saying.
Memories....!!!
"An expert is someone who has made all the mistakes in his or her field" - Niels Bohr
|
|
|
|
|
lib name.obj
Will create name.lib.
lib name.obj /out:othername.lib
Will create othername.lib
HOWEVER, it won't do you any good. Object files in libraries are included as a unit. It won't pick routines out of the object file.
Tim Smith
I know what you're thinking punk, you're thinking did he spell check this document? Well, to tell you the truth I kinda forgot myself in all this excitement. But being this here's CodeProject, the most powerful forums in the world and would blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question, Do I feel lucky? Well do ya punk?
|
|
|
|
|
Cool...I did not know you could do that...
Thanx!
"An expert is someone who has made all the mistakes in his or her field" - Niels Bohr
|
|
|
|
|
Tim Smith,
Thank you so much.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All!
Does somebody know how to restart DHCP?
Thanks,
Ola Carlsson
|
|
|
|
|
On what?
- Matt Newman
-Sonork ID: 100.11179:BestSnowman
Frankly AOL should stick to what it does best: Fooling millions of americans into believing that it, AOL, is the web. -Paul Watson
|
|
|
|
|
I'm assuming your talking about an NT-based machine? Use the command line...
C:\>net stop dhcp
C:\>net start dhcp
You can do this behind-the-scenes from a program. Just remember you won't get control back until the statement finishes executing (in the same thread that is). If you are looking for something different, please give more details.
Jeremy L. Falcon
"The One Who Said, 'The One Who Said...'"
|
|
|
|
|
At a Command Prompt, enter the following:
ipconfig /release_all
ipconfig /renew_all
Josh Knox
that-guy.net
"Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you're a mile away, and you have their shoes." - author unknown
|
|
|
|
|
Should work on Win98, ME, 2000 and XP
/Ola
|
|
|
|
|
I have recently started learning some more computer graphics (mostly 2D) for my hobby projects. My question is if I should dig deeper into DirectX or OpenGL? DirectX has better performance (on MS platforms), but is more complex. OpenGL has the advantage of better portability, but lack some of the bells and whistles of DirectX. Are these observations correct, and which do you suggest for learning?
Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Thanks
/moliate
|
|
|
|
|
This article at GameDev is about this exact topic.
My personal view is that OpenGL is not lacking in performance or capabilities (refer to Quake3) and is a bit simpler to use but I have not done any significant programming with DX. Given the large volume of samples and tutorials on OpenGL I think it would probably be better to learn with initially.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the article! Must admit that the bulk of code required to write even the simplest DirectX app was getting me down, but I thought it was the way to do it on MS platforms.
I'll take a furter look at OpenGL...
/moliate
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
I am wondering how to get the actual COM interface (let's say ISpeedometer) of an ActiveX control on a dialog in MFC. In ATL, you can do this pretty easily with GetDialogControl, which will give you a pointer to IUknown of the control, which can be queried for the more derived interface of interest. I assume there must be a way to do something like this in MFC. I am trying to get arond the generic wrapper class generated by class wizard which just gets to all of a control's functionality through its IDispatch interface.
Thanks,
Aaron
|
|
|
|
|
So you have IDispatch? Why don't you QueryInterface for ISpeedometer?
Tomasz Sowinski -- http://www.shooltz.com
|
|
|
|
|
No, I don't have any interfaces. Just the ID of the control on the dialog resource. So I need to get an interface, any interface.
I figured out how to do this using CWnd::GetControlUnknown, which gave me IUnknown for the ActiveX control, from which I can query for more specific interfaces.
Thanks,
Aaron
|
|
|
|
|
I recently ported an old VC++ program from 6.0 to .NET. There were a few issues to begin with, but the only thing that I've changed in the product is that I'm using the Shared DLL option to reference MFC now instead of Static Library. The program builds fine and runs, but when I perform pointer intensive operations the performance in .NET is horrible. We're talking an order of magnitude here. Execution that takes 2 seconds in 6.0 takes 30 seconds in .NET. I've tried all the optimizations I can think of but none of them did anything to increase performance. Should I just stick to 6.0 for now? Why is it so slow? It's unmanaged code so I don't think GC would be affecting performance at all. It seems like it is though. What's the deal? Any input is appreciated.
myenigmaself
http://myenigmaself.gaiden.com
myenigmaself@yahoo.com
"If debugging is the process of removing bugs from code, programming must be the process of putting them in."~~Dykstra
|
|
|
|
|
What you say is very surprising, to say the least. Could you isolate some snippet of code showing this behavior? Also, although I don't think is having any effect, it'd be useful to perform the testing on as similar scenarios as possible --that implies having the same linkage method for MFC.
Joaquín M López Muñoz
Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo
|
|
|
|
|
The code would be a little ambiguous taken out of context so let me see if I can figure out a smaller example or see if there is something I can do about this.
And could the fact that I have VC++6.0 still installed be messing things up? I think the MFC Versions are getting crossed up. I can no longer used a Shared DLL in my VC++ 6.0 projects.
"If debugging is the process of removing bugs from code, programming must be the process of putting them in."~~Dykstra
|
|
|
|
|
Forget this. No matter what I do I can't get my old code to use a static library in vc7. Here's the kicker, my code HAS to use a static library in vc6. For some reason I can no longer use the linked dll in vc6. This is messed up. I'm going home.
"If debugging is the process of removing bugs from code, programming must be the process of putting them in."~~Dykstra
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
