CompuServe Thread

This is a nature of C++. Without going into much explanation, function names in C++ are "mangled" in order to differentiate between similar named functions in different classes. Because these names are exported [by the linker] you must use a same compiler that "mangles" a function name the same way. This is the reason. Unless another compiler mangles the names in the same way VC++ does, you must use it to generate DLL's for MAX. It is possible, however, to write, using VC++, an interface plugin. This would allow anyone to write anything using any language. A direct plug-in for MAX will have to be written using VC++ as they are classes derived from MAX (which was written with VC++). That, in itself, does not mean you couldn't write a plug-in in Algol, provided you also write an interface for it.

>> Well, it's not *strictly* true, but it is true. >> Using a product called Visual DLL (around $250) you can >> create DLLs with VB. Actually my comment WAS strictly true since I said "with VB". You are saying with VB and Visual DLL. <g> However, some time ago when I was monitoring the VB forum, there was a rather extensive discussion of this very topic. The comments from the people who seemed to know the most were that some very real problems existed with the product. I wrote it off as not worth considering and don't recall the details now. >> …can MAX use DLLs and, if so, why would it care what >> produced them? Yes, that seems obvious. A proper DLL is a proper DLL, as long as it is a proper 32 bit NT type DLL. I just took it as being mostly a documentation thing. Assuming that there is really good docs and assuming that these docs are very specific to MSC++ with very many and detailed examples (using MS Class libraries), then a person might have some difficulty with another compiler (except Gus G who knows all<g>).