|Why some PC C compilers are useless firstname.lastname@example.org (1992-05-07)|
|Re: Why some PC C compilers are useless email@example.com (1992-05-08)|
|Re: Why some PC C compilers are useless firstname.lastname@example.org (1992-05-11)|
|Re: Why some PC C compilers are useless Zoid@mindlink.bc.ca (1992-05-11)|
|Re: Why some PC C compilers are useless email@example.com (Bob Montante) (1992-05-12)|
|Re: Why some PC C compilers are useless firstname.lastname@example.org (1992-05-13)|
|Re: Why some PC C compilers are useless email@example.com.Virginia.EDU (1992-05-14)|
|From:||firstname.lastname@example.org (Simon J Gerraty)|
|Organization:||Bull HN Information Systems Australia|
|Date:||Mon, 11 May 1992 00:01:49 GMT|
I knew this subject would start a flame fest.... insulting someone's
favourite compiler is like insulting their editor :-)
Anyway, email@example.com offers the same advise as many others have via
e-mail (some not so polite :-). Problem is, they have all missed the
firstname.lastname@example.org (Simon J. Gerraty) writes:
> Please do _not_ use "text" mode for reading the source! A C compiler
> should not care whether a line of source ends in CR,LF or just a LF.
I thought that was a pretty clear requirement statement.
>I use both G++ on a Sparc, and Borland/Turbo C++ on a PC on the same
>source code, no problems. I use a "fixup" routine when moving code
>between platforms that does CR/LF correction. i.e. when saving files to
>floppy for transport between platforms my script/batch command does the
>fixup before writing. It's painless and quick, been doing it for years.
This is basically the approach that every one suggests and is precisely
what I am currently doing. Its also precisely what is aggravating me.
Haven't you guys ever tried a network? I don't know about you, but my
sparc station takes quite a while to unix2dos files onto a floppy. Then
there's my sun386 at home where the DOS compiler runs on the UNIX system -
using the UNIX filesystem!
_Sharing_ source (as opposed to copying it around) is destroyed by the
need to run unix2dos/dos2unix or any other "fixup" filter. Try this:
cd /local/src/X11R5/mit # or any large project or your choice
find . -print | xargs touch
Notice anything? You didn't edit any files, but you had to sit for a few
hours while the second make repeated all the work of the first. Now try
and tell me that "It's painless and quick..."
>[I suspect the issue is that there are no floppies involved -- the PC uses
>NFS or some other network to use the files on the Unix host, so making
>separate copies with returns added is a major pain in the neck. Lots of
>DOS programs work correctly with text files that don't contain returns.
>There is no technical reason why a compiler should care. -John]
Got it in one!
Simon J. Gerraty <email@example.com> (Work)
[I run DOS under Unix here and can second the complaints about programs
that freak out when they encounter newlines without carriage returns. I
can have some sympathy for dusty old programs, but not much for current
supprted ones when they do this. -John]
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.