| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 275.1 | | ANGORA::SMCAFEE | Steve McAfee | Mon Jan 26 1987 17:33 | 13 |
|
I modified the VMS part of a version of SHAR.C which was last modified
by Dave Wecker. My version changes the 2nd and subsequent "." chars
to "x". You can get this from:
ANT::BIPOLAR:[SMCAFEE.PUBLIC]SHAR.*
Remember when you download the files to your amiga you may need
to change the x's back to .'s! Esp for the ASDG Recoverable RAM
disk :-).
steve mcafee
|
| 275.2 | | KIRK::LONG | | Mon Jan 26 1987 18:50 | 13 |
| Thanks Steve,
I'll give that a try ( beats editing the SHAR file )
I guess I'll have to break down and buy the new MANX C so I
can do something about this myself. I have Lattice C but
found it so unfriendly that I haven't done anything serious
with it since I downloaded the VT100 sources months ago.
Since then I have really appreciated the postings of the .ARC
files.
The only problem with having to unSHAR on the VAX is
the KERMIT-ting of 20 files to the Amiga :-(
Dick Long
|
| 275.3 | Lattice has no problems with SHAR.C | TLE::RMEYERS | Randy Meyers | Mon Jan 26 1987 21:08 | 29 |
| Re .2:
SHAR.C compiles without any changes under Lattice C (at least under
version 3.10). So, don't be afraid to build your own copy of SHAR.
I am not sure what you you mean by the unfriendliness of Lattice C.
The only problem that I have had with compiling Manx programs with
Lattice C is that the typical Manx program will get a very large number
of warnings. It has been my experience that about 95% of the warnings
are deserved (the other 5% seem are bugs where Lattice issues a warning
where one is not deserved). Although the program that gets the warnings
works, it contains many constructs of questionable taste. The biggest
offender is non-void routines that fail to return values. If you don't
like seeing these warnings, a switch to the compiler will turn them off.
So far, my score in porting code between Manx to Lattice has been:
one Lattice bug, one Manx bug, and one general C problem that interferes
with writing transportable code.
If your only experience with Lattice has been trying to port Manx code,
take heart. The problems that you are seeing are not due to the quality
of Lattice C, but due to the general problems with porting code between
any two C compilers.
I don't wish to imply that there are no reasons for switching to Manx.
Manx does produce better code and the new Manx debugger sounds like
a real plus. However, Lattice has some points in its favor as well.
Lattice is closer to meeting the draft ANSI standard and does a better
job of error checking the code (for example, argument checking).
|
| 275.4 | | COUGAR::SMCAFEE | Steve McAfee | Tue Jan 27 1987 12:19 | 14 |
|
I tried compiling shar.c last night with Lattice 3.03 and there
were several routines which were not available in this version.
Offhand I remember CTIME and INDEX. Apparently, 3.10 added these
new routines to their libraries?
BTW Randy, I bought my Lattice C in the white package (i guess
that means commodore). What did you have to do to get the 3.10
upgrade.
regards,
steve mcafee
|
| 275.5 | Shar is Available (and so is Lattice C) | TLE::RMEYERS | Randy Meyers | Wed Jan 28 1987 05:05 | 13 |
| Re .*:
I have uploaded a ARC file that contains both source and executable for
Shar. The location is:
TLE""::UPORT$:[RMEYERS.TRADE]SHAR.ARC
Re: .4:
I have heard that Lattice is willing to upgrade people who bought their
compiler from Commodore. Call Lattice and ask for details. Their phone
number is (312) 858-7950.
|
| 275.6 | Many Thanks | KIRK::LONG | | Wed Jan 28 1987 11:22 | 6 |
| Randy,
Many thanks for the upload, can't wait to go home and try
it with the ASDG ram disk :-)
Dick
|