Not according to the author of ILMerge (Mike Barnett), as of 03/29/2006.
Thanks, Serge -----Original Message----- From: Discussion of advanced .NET topics. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ted Neward Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 4:37 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Modules... The latest builds of ILMerge can merge unmanaged code assemblies as well as managed code ones, IIRC. Ted Neward Author, Presenter, Consultant Java, .NET, XML services http://www.tedneward.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Discussion of advanced .NET topics. [mailto:ADVANCED- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter van der Weerd > Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 11:31 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Modules... > > Well, the tool ILMerge from MS Research doesn't allow you to merge modules > with any anmanaged code in it. For me that is the biggest need for > multi-module assemblies. > > For example: if I want to have some unmanaged exports from a managed > module. > This is not possible from C#, but it is from ILAsm. You can't link them > together though (at least I don't know how) because ilasm will not support > generation of a module. I agree that MS doesn't stimulate usage of modules > at all. > > However, ILMerge doesn't accept dll's with unmanaged exports... > > So, the only way to do such things seems to be: > 1) (very, very ugly!!) > - use ildasm to generate an IL from the DLL > - hack the generated .IL > - ilasm to re-assemble the .IL into a .DLL > > 2) > Link the modules with a C++ file and use the C++ linker. > This will include lots of unmanaged code in yout .DLL > > Or do I miss something? > > Peewee > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brock Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 7:19 PM > Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Modules... > > > |I can't recall ever reading anything from MSFT where they're recommended. > I > | think the cases I cite are the ones where they make sense given the > plumbing > | that we have at hand. And as for #1, IIRC, that's not even useful > anymore > | since there's some tool from MS Research that will merge modules into a > | single assembly. > | > | -Brock > | http://staff.develop.com/ballen > | > | > | > -----Original Message----- > | > From: Discussion of advanced .NET topics. > | > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > | > Shawn Wildermuth > | > Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 8:14 PM > | > To: [email protected] > | > Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Modules... > | > > | > While useful, sounds much more like a niche use than a recommended > | > use...(modules, not just your occasion). WOuld you generally > | > agree with > | > that? > | > > | > > | > > | > > | > Thanks, > | > > | > Shawn Wildermuth > | > http://adoguy.com > | > C# MVP, MCSD.NET, Author and Speaker > | > > | > > | > -----Original Message----- > | > From: Discussion of advanced .NET topics. > | > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brock Allen > | > Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 8:08 PM > | > To: [email protected] > | > Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Modules... > | > > | > I think the classic situations were either 1) mixed language assembly > | > creation, or 2) network deploy of modules that aren't loaded > | > often since > | > modules are demand loaded. > | > > | > -Brock > | > http://staff.develop.com/ballen > | > > | > > | > > -----Original Message----- > | > > From: Discussion of advanced .NET topics. > | > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shawn > | > > Wildermuth > | > > Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 7:56 PM > | > > To: [email protected] > | > > Subject: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Modules... > | > > > | > > When I got started with .NET after the PDC build some half > | > a decade or > | > > so ago, I like the idea that an Assembly could contain one more more > | > > modules. > | > > It seemed to me that being able to separate development in a team > | > > across assemblies that the build could then build into a single > | > > assembly was an attractive idea. There has never been Visual Studio > | > > support for this (though the command-line compiler for C# does (not > | > > positive about the VB.NET compiler)). > | > > > | > > Does anyone actually do this in any situations? csc /t:module is > | > > interesting, but I can't find a use where I could recommend it to a > | > > customer for their production systems. Anyone? > | > > > | > > Thanks, > | > > > | > > Shawn Wildermuth > | > > <blocked::http://adoguy.com/> http://adoguy.com C# MVP, MCSD.NET, > | > > Author and Speaker > | > > > | > > > | > > > | > > =================================== > | > > This list is hosted by DevelopMentor. http://www.develop.com > | > > > | > > View archives and manage your subscription(s) at > | > > http://discuss.develop.com > | > > > | > > | > =================================== > | > This list is hosted by DevelopMentor. http://www.develop.com > | > > | > View archives and manage your subscription(s) at > | > http://discuss.develop.com > | > > | > =================================== > | > This list is hosted by DevelopMentor. http://www.develop.com > | > > | > View archives and manage your subscription(s) at > | > http://discuss.develop.com > | > > | > | =================================== > | This list is hosted by DevelopMentorR http://www.develop.com > | > | View archives and manage your subscription(s) at > http://discuss.develop.com > > =================================== > This list is hosted by DevelopMentorR http://www.develop.com > > View archives and manage your subscription(s) at > http://discuss.develop.com =================================== This list is hosted by DevelopMentor(r) http://www.develop.com View archives and manage your subscription(s) at http://discuss.develop.com =================================== This list is hosted by DevelopMentor® http://www.develop.com View archives and manage your subscription(s) at http://discuss.develop.com
