Re: Why some PC C compilers are useless

I knew this subject would start a flame fest.... insulting someone's
favourite compiler is like insulting their editor :-)


Anyway, cliffc@rice.edu offers the same advise as many others have via
e-mail (some not so polite :-). Problem is, they have all missed the
point.


sjg@zen.void.oz.au (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.


Cliff suggests:
>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
make
find . -print | xargs touch
make


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 <sjg@melb.bull.oz.au> (Work)
<sjg@zen.void.oz.au> (Home)
[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 comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.