Dear friends.
I am planning to migrate some executables to 64 bits. I just compiled SDL2 to 64 bits using Intel C 2013 SP1 update 3, it was not easy but it is done and working. The problem is that the generated dll is also names SDL2.dll. I also keep some executables as 32 bits code using SDL2.dll.
Any advice for a set of executables sharing a common folder and needing SLD2 in 64 and 32 bits mode?
Thanks.------------------------
Armando Alaminos Bouza
Aren’t you expected to keep them in separate folders in the first
place? (the executable files only, that is) Even moreso since from the
compiler’s viewpoint they’re separate platforms (so they have their
files stored separately) and from the system’s viewpoint, well, you
should only have one of them installed in the first place.
It may be easier to just find a way to keep them in separate folders.
2015-03-17 13:16 GMT-03:00, alabouza :> Dear friends.
I am planning to migrate some executables to 64 bits. I just compiled SDL2
to 64 bits using Intel C 2013 SP1 update 3, it was not easy but it is done
and working. The problem is that the generated dll is also names SDL2.dll. I
also keep some executables as 32 bits code using SDL2.dll.
Any advice for a set of executables sharing a common folder and needing SLD2
in 64 and 32 bits mode?
Thanks.
Armando Alaminos Bouza
When I make my library I just keep them in separate 32bit and 64bit folders, and link them up for their respective compilations. If you’re using Visual Studio, it just means placing the correct DLLs with the correct executable and setting the additional library dependencies for each output mode to it’s respective folders.