Archives
D Programming
DD.gnu digitalmars.D digitalmars.D.bugs digitalmars.D.dtl digitalmars.D.dwt digitalmars.D.announce digitalmars.D.learn digitalmars.D.debugger C/C++ Programming
c++c++.announce c++.atl c++.beta c++.chat c++.command-line c++.dos c++.dos.16-bits c++.dos.32-bits c++.idde c++.mfc c++.rtl c++.stl c++.stl.hp c++.stl.port c++.stl.sgi c++.stlsoft c++.windows c++.windows.16-bits c++.windows.32-bits c++.wxwindows digitalmars.empire digitalmars.DMDScript |
c++ - Args passing and returning scheme
I read carefully (?) the docs and there is one puzzling fact about the way DM returns results from C function. (I am still talking about C and Win32) As it is said different from the way MS is doing it, does this really mean that I can *safelly* run a program compiled and linked with DM, dynamically bound to a MS produced dll ? In the doc it is said that it may not work. But then user32.dll, gdi32.dll et al. are giving good results only because they are _pascal ??? If I understand right, with Watcom C, if I compile using register passing conventions (5r) I can still dynamically use MS style dll because they are declared as _cdecl in the .h file. right ? Not same with DM ? Can you technically enlighten me ? Jean-Pierre Dumas Jan 27 2002
"Jean-Pierre H. Dumas" wrote:I read carefully (?) the docs and there is one puzzling fact about the way DM returns results from C function. (I am still talking about C and Win32) As it is said different from the way MS is doing it, does this really mean that I can *safelly* run a program compiled and linked with DM, dynamically bound to a MS produced dll ? Jan 27 2002
|