Wei Dai wrote:
>> So the idea of Crypto++ "lite" arises out of an "iostreams-less" version
>> of the library, so that it can be built with this "style" of STLport
>> usage... with a side-effect of a smaller and simpler library that *may*
>> be useful in some small-memory niches, all for the low, low cost of
>> defining (and as you point out, maintaining) a vcproj file. :)
>
> I see. The problem is that the cost isn't that low, because I have to
> support multiple compilers, and don't want to create, test and maintain new
> project files for each. Plus I'm not sure anyone else besides you is
> interested in the "lite" project. Of course if you want to share it with
> others, you can post it to the Crypto++ wiki, or the Google group, or your
> own web site if you have one, etc.
I didn't think you were going to go for this. :)
> The problem of hash-function-only usage causing the linker to pull in
> unnecessary iostream code is a more general one that might affect many more
> people, which is why I wanted to get that fixed.
Hmmm. So how did the changes to iterhash.{cpp,h} which I rather you
hadn't made (since they made my exe larger and are now less clear than
previously) address this? And *why* did code size get worse?
> Are there any other questions I haven't answered?
Something about CRYPTOPP_MANUALLY_INSTANTIATE_TEMPLATES would be cool
and a) what it does in general, and b) why does code get smaller if I
define it on the CLIENT side? It even reduces some of the extra size
introduced by the iterhash.{cpp,h} changes - but doesn't get rid of all
of it.
Robert Roessler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.rftp.com
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "Crypto++ Users"
Google Group.
To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More information about Crypto++ and this group is available at
http://www.cryptopp.com.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
