Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!mit-eddie!bbn.com!nic!chaos.cs.brandeis.edu!chaos!phils From: phils@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Phil Shapiro) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer Subject: Re: THINK C linking wish Message-ID: Date: 5 Dec 90 19:44:54 GMT References: <16796@natinst.natinst.com> <109545@convex.convex.com> <1842@metaphor.Metaphor.COM> Sender: @chaos.cs.brandeis.edu Distribution: usa Organization: Symantec Corp. Lines: 29 In-Reply-To: emg@jobone.metaphor.com's message of 4 Dec 90 19:15:47 GMT In article <1842@metaphor.Metaphor.COM> emg@jobone.metaphor.com (Mike Greenawalt) writes: I would like to be sure that I understand this completely. For a long time I have believed that Think C linked the entire library if a "library" is used to contain the compiled code, but only linked in a file if a "project" is used to contain the compiled code. That's right. You now seem to be saying that only the file`s worth of code containing the referenced function is linked in if a "library" is used. Does the "library" structure remember the file structure of its contents? No. Please contrast using a "project" versus using a "library". In my opinion the Think C docs are a bit weak in this area. Sorry to futher confuse the issue... You are correct, only "nested" projects (that is, projects that are added to other projects) support this link optimization. I get in the habit of calling projects that are used in this way "libraries" -- most programmers would never want to use real libraries. -phil -- Phil Shapiro Technical Support Analyst Language Products Group Symantec Corporation Internet: phils@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu