G
Guest
Hello,
I have a large legacy MFC application. As is typical, there is an
executable along with several MFC DLLs. One of these DLLs is created by
staticly linking in many libraries resulting in one very large DLL that has
the bulk of the code.
I've downloaded the MFCWinFormsSample.EXE and have noticed that the main app
could stay as a native executable (i.e. no CLR support) whereas the various
..DLLs can be marked as having CLR support (using /clr switch).
My question is, what is the level of granularity that one can apply the CLR
support - is it only at the executable/DLL level or can it be applied at a
static library level, where that static library is linked into a DLL that
does not have CLR support enabled (and the other static libraries also don't
have CLR support enabled)? I expect the latter is not possible but thought I
would ask. My motivation is that I've got a lot of native code and would
like to keep it native as much as possible, to maintain optimal performance
and to avoid putting a bunch of pramas in all the other static libraries to
keep them native. I'm using VS 2005, if it makes any difference.
Thanks,
Notre
I have a large legacy MFC application. As is typical, there is an
executable along with several MFC DLLs. One of these DLLs is created by
staticly linking in many libraries resulting in one very large DLL that has
the bulk of the code.
I've downloaded the MFCWinFormsSample.EXE and have noticed that the main app
could stay as a native executable (i.e. no CLR support) whereas the various
..DLLs can be marked as having CLR support (using /clr switch).
My question is, what is the level of granularity that one can apply the CLR
support - is it only at the executable/DLL level or can it be applied at a
static library level, where that static library is linked into a DLL that
does not have CLR support enabled (and the other static libraries also don't
have CLR support enabled)? I expect the latter is not possible but thought I
would ask. My motivation is that I've got a lot of native code and would
like to keep it native as much as possible, to maintain optimal performance
and to avoid putting a bunch of pramas in all the other static libraries to
keep them native. I'm using VS 2005, if it makes any difference.
Thanks,
Notre