nelson_p@apollo.HP.COM (Peter Nelson) (02/15/90)
A while back I posted a question about allocating large 2
dimensional arrays AND ACCESSING THEM AS 2 DIMENSIONAL
ARRAYS. Specifically, I wanted to allocate a number of
2d arrays in which no individual array would exceed 64K
but the total for all of them would exceed 64K.
Compilers which support the 'huge' memory model, like
Microsoft's have no problem with this ....
char array1[200][200]
char array2[200][200]
The Zortech runs out of memory with this. Of course you
can work around it by mallocating the space. If you want
to retain something like the desired data structure you can
mallocate a row of pointeres to columns of 1d arrays, etc, etc.
But why does Zortech make you go to this trouble?
Anyway, I've run into some other problems too:
My application involves Cellular Automata. Such programs
run for hours in graphics mode. I also have fractal programs
that run for a long time.
What if I have a 1-hour program that I want to stop after 5
minutes because I don't like the way it's turning out? I could
type Break or ctrl-C except that once Zortech enters graphics
mode it disables this feature! And, as far as I can tell, none
of the "get" string or character functions (getc, getch, etc)
Zortech supplies will return without *waiting for a keystroke*,
so I can't write a routine which periodically checks to see if
anyone has typed "quit" or something from the keyboard. I imagine
there must be some DOS call that can fix this. But why does
Zortech create the need to find a workaround in the first place?
Zortech itself had no helpful suggestions on this either except to
reboot the machine (gee, thanks) but one of their experts is
going to take a closer look at this issue.
An even more glaring problem is the apparent lack of any way
to output text in graphics mode!!! I was so surprised when I
saw this that I called the Zortech office to make sure. They
confirmed it: there is no way to put text on the screen with their
"improved" Flash Graphics package. I'v been in the computer
graphics biz since 1982 and I've never seen a graphics package
or set of graphics library calls that didn't offer some rudimentary
text capability! Even my $70 QuickC can output text in graphics
mode!
Finally, I tried running one of my programs, which ran just fine
on my own Hercules monochrome display, on a friend's 286 system
with a Paradise VGA card. Zortech sez that at fg_init time they
check to see what kind of graphics card is present and set up
to output to that. No such luck. The software mangled the timing
of the VGA display and outputted ca-ca. I called Zortech and they
suggested there was something wrong with the card. My friend has
two kids and LOTS of game sofware and has never had any other problems.
I've only used a tiny subset of Zortech's C and C++ and library
features and I'm dismayed at the number of problems I've already
found. Right now Zortech is the only game in town for C++ on a PC.
But when Microsoft and Borland release their long-awaited products
Zortech runs a serious risk of being completely blown away if it
doesn't clean up its act fast.
---Peterpeter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (02/15/90)
In article <48a441bf.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM> nelson_p@apollo.HP.COM (Peter Nelson) writes: > What if I have a 1-hour program that I want to stop after 5 > minutes because I don't like the way it's turning out? I could > type Break or ctrl-C except that once Zortech enters graphics > mode it disables this feature! Good for them. The way most C compilers implement 'BREAK' is a total sham. DOS does not provide the support to do the job right, so DOS programs have to poll the keyboard periodically looking for ^C (yes, I know it's a *little* more complicated than that, but it comes down to checking for ^C periodically). Since you're doing that polling anyway, why not do something like: while(stuff is going on) { do useful work(); if(kbhit()) { switch(getch()) { case CTRL('C'): set exit flag; ... } } if(exit flag) break; } clean_up_after_yourself(); After all, this is what you're doing anyway. Why not do it explicitly? > And, as far as I can tell, none > of the "get" string or character functions (getc, getch, etc) > Zortech supplies will return without *waiting for a keystroke*, > so I can't write a routine which periodically checks to see if > anyone has typed "quit" or something from the keyboard. See above. kbhit() is a handful of lines long. If Zortec doesn't provide one, a few minutes perusal of your DOS manual should handle it. I'm directing followups to comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer. Congratulations on being the first resident of the new group. > Zortech itself had no helpful suggestions on this either except to > reboot the machine (gee, thanks) but one of their experts is > going to take a closer look at this issue. Sounds like Zortech needs a few new experts. -- _--_|\ Peter da Silva. +1 713 274 5180. <peter@ficc.uu.net>. / \ \_.--._/ Xenix Support -- it's not just a job, it's an adventure! v "Have you hugged your wolf today?" `-_-'
bright@Data-IO.COM (From: bright@sauk.Data-IO.COM (Walter Bright)) (02/17/90)
In article <48a441bf.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM> nelson_p@apollo.HP.COM (Peter Nelson) writes:
< What if I have a 1-hour program that I want to stop after 5
< minutes because I don't like the way it's turning out? I could
< type Break or ctrl-C except that once Zortech enters graphics
< mode it disables this feature!
Not hardly. The graphics package does nothing with ^C. ^C is only checked
for by DOS when you call a DOS function. The graphics package does not
call DOS. If you want ^C checking, you'll need to sprinkle in a few
calls to DOS inbetween calls to the graphics routines.
< And, as far as I can tell, none
< of the "get" string or character functions (getc, getch, etc)
< Zortech supplies will return without *waiting for a keystroke*,
Notice the standard function kbhit(), on pg. 245, which does exactly this.
< An even more glaring problem is the apparent lack of any way
< to output text in graphics mode!!!
I suppose it's glaring if you hadn't noticed the function fg_putc()
on pg. 182.
< Finally, I tried running one of my programs, which ran just fine
< on my own Hercules monochrome display, on a friend's 286 system
< with a Paradise VGA card. Zortech sez that at fg_init time they
< check to see what kind of graphics card is present and set up
< to output to that. No such luck. The software mangled the timing
< of the VGA display and outputted ca-ca.
This'll happen if you do not have a multisync monitor and fg_init
switches it into a mode that your monitor does not support. Set
the environment variable FG_DISPLAY to a mode that both your graphics
board *and* your monitor support. See page 177-178 of your manual.
< I've only used a tiny subset of Zortech's C and C++ and library
< features and I'm dismayed at the number of problems I've already
< found.
DOS programming, graphics programming, and C++ programming are all
complex subjects. All the 'problems' you're having appear to be caused
by lack of familiarity with these topics. I recommend that you read:
1. Zortech C++ Function Reference
2. MS-DOS Technical Reference
3. Programmer's Guide to PC and PS/2 Video Systemskgreen@dukeac.UUCP (Kendall B Green) (02/18/90)
fg_puts works to output text strings to the graphic screen. khbit works to check the keyboard for input. I have put the following in my environment SET FG_DISPLAY=HERCFULL and I never have any problems with fg_init not knowing what kind of display adapter I have. Peter may have to change the set the environment for his friends VGA board. Peter Nelson should have read the Zortech manuals and studied the source code provided before flaming Zortech! -- Kendall B. Green Duke University Medical Center Durham, NC 27710 kgreen@dukeac.ac.duke.edu or ...mcnc!escgate!dukeac!kgreen
nelson_p@apollo.HP.COM (Peter Nelson) (02/22/90)
Walter Bright posts...
:DOS programming, graphics programming, and C++ programming are all
:complex subjects. All the 'problems' you're having appear to be caused
:by lack of familiarity with these topics. I recommend that you read:
But remember, that ALL of these questions, and many others, were
brought to the Zortech tech support staff first. And were only
passed on to the net when they didn't know the answers!
[ Btw, 'graphics programming' is what I do for a living; I'm quite
certain I know at least as much about it than anyone at Zortech.
This does not mean that I know much about what passes for computer
graphics in the PC world. And the "flash graphics" library
is Zortech's creation so it isn't unreasonable to assume that
they know how to make it work. ]
...and Peter da Silva posts
:> Zortech itself had no helpful suggestions on this either except to
:> reboot the machine (gee, thanks) but one of their experts is
:> going to take a closer look at this issue.
:
:Sounds like Zortech needs a few new experts.
Zortech clearly needs to bolster their tech support. The people
I've spoken to there have seemed sincere but I don't think there
is a *single case* where they knew the answer to any of my
questions!
I've had better luck with their BBS. Walter Bright and Joe Huffman
monitor the board (I think its Walter's board) and have proven
very knowledgable. But I'm unclear what their relation is with
the company. The company is in London, UK, and Alington, Mass.
Why is the BBS in Washington State? The people in Arlington
are a little vague on what Walter and Joe's relationship is with
Zortech; I get the impression that they are some kind of consult-
ants who write a lot of their code. But Walter's "Organization:" is
listed as "Data-IO Corporation; Redmond, WA". Also calling a BBS
in a distant state, and then calling back several times to see
if anyone might have left an answer on the board and then doing
followup questions/answers is very expensive compared to a short
phone conversation with knowledgable staff.
They seem to have a good product. It is certainly much improved over
vers. 1.07. But their customer support is easily the WORST that
I've ever encountered in this industry! Given that this was the
single most expensive piece of software that I've ever bought I
think I could have expected more professionalism.
Zortech must develop an IN-HOUSE source of technical expertise. It is very
unprofessional for a tech support staff to send people to a private
BBS to answer questions about their product. I feel like their company
is being run as a hobby. They can get by like this only as long as
they have no serious competition in C++. That won't be for long.
Latest stumper: My new VGA card supports 640X480 X 256 colors. I
called yesterday to ask them how I can write code to use more than
16 colors. They said they would "get back to me". Stay tuned.
---Petercs551djc@iitmax.IIT.EDU (Daniel Ciarlette) (02/22/90)
In article <48c74cd1.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM> nelson_p@apollo.HP.COM (Peter Nelson) writes: > Walter Bright posts... >:DOS programming, graphics programming, and C++ programming are all >:complex subjects. All the 'problems' you're having appear to be caused We must not forget that by Walter Bright replying to this message that it implies that he actually READS the stuff we post. I wish people at Microsoft and Borland could give me personal service by the people that actually write their stuff. Also, Zortech does nothing to hide their bugs. It's nearly impossible to get information about bugs in other compilers. In my 2.06 upgrade I believe there was a list of bugs (and C++ v2.0 features) that was listed to help me out. I've never really had a problem with Zortech's v2.0 C++ product. But, I did find a deficiency and I posted it to the Byte Information Exchange (BIX) on their conference. I send it to Walter and he responded to me. I call that personal service. Everyone keeps saying that Zortech is in for problems when Borland & Microsoft (let's not forget TopSpeed) come out with C++. Well, I agree their support is not the best. It's better than a year ago. Also, let's wait and see how Microsoft, Borland and TopSpeed do. C++ isn't as easy to implement as C. Saying the others will stomp on Zortech when they come out is like saying Chevy's new secret line will beat out Ford's existing line of trucks. It may, but then why aren't they out? Please, I am not saying Zortech's the answer to everything. I agree they have problems I just thought that the word of a satisfied customer should be heard. Dan Ciarlette
coy@ssc-vax.UUCP (Stephen B Coy) (02/23/90)
In article <48c74cd1.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM>, nelson_p@apollo.HP.COM (Peter Nelson) writes: > Latest stumper: My new VGA card supports 640X480 X 256 colors. I > called yesterday to ask them how I can write code to use more than > 16 colors. They said they would "get back to me". Stay tuned. > > ---Peter Why should Zortech know anything about programming your vga card? 640x480x256 is a non-standard vga mode. You'd be much better off calling the board manufacturer or posting a request for code to comp.sys.ibm.pc. Your complaints about Zortech's support may be justified but most of your problems would have been solved by reading the manual. Pour yourself a homebrew, find a fireplace, curl up any read the manual. Most of all, relax. We'll all be happier. Stephen Coy uw-beaver!ssc-vax!coy
bright@Data-IO.COM (Walter Bright) (02/24/90)
In article <48c74cd1.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM> nelson_p@apollo.HP.COM (Peter Nelson) writes:
< The company is in London, UK, and Alington, Mass.
< Why is the BBS in Washington State?
Zortech has offices in London, Arlington and Seattle. So what?
< But Walter's "Organization:" is
< listed as "Data-IO Corporation; Redmond, WA".
Data I/O is kind enough to let me use their Usenet connection.
Zortech doesn't have a VAX.
< They can get by like this only as long as
< they have no serious competition in C++. That won't be for long.
People have been predicting the imminent demise of Zortech (and
previously Datalight) since day 1. The usual reason given is that
the 'next' release by Borland/Microsoft is just going to blow
us away. Well, we've been in business for 6 years and do better
every year. The eternal next release, when it materializes,
usually evokes the comment "yeah, but the 'next' release ..." :-)
The compiler was started back in 1983. The universal comment I
got from everyone was "Why are you doing that? You can't possibly
compete against the 'big' companies." They're quite wrong.mark.freedman@canremote.uucp (MARK FREEDMAN) (02/24/90)
kP>Peter Nelson should have read the Zortech manuals and studied the
kP>source code provided before flaming Zortech!
kP>--
kP>Kendall B. Green
kP>kgreen@dukeac.ac.duke.edu or ...mcnc!escgate!dukeac!kgreen
What ????? and BREAK with **TRADITION** ????
:-)
mark.freedman@canremote.uucp - Toronto, Ontario, Canada
---
~ DeLuxe 1.11a20 #4219 **NEVER** RTFM ... complaining is MUCH more fun ..mark@intek01.UUCP (Mark McWiggins) (02/26/90)
gsarff@meph.UUCP (Gary Sarff) writes: > ... Of course this point is irrelevant to >the actual quality of their compiler, and the fact that the pc user wanting >C++ really doesn't have much choice _but_ Zortech... Say WHAT!? We sell 2.0 for the 80286 and 80386, Guidelines supports the 286 with 2.0, Glockenspiel/Oasys has a version (don't know if they're at 2.0 yet), I think Comeau has a DOS version ... Sounds like a lot of choices to me, unless by "pc user" you meant somebody developing on an 8088. Maybe it's time for The Guy With The Product List to post his latest version. -- Mark McWiggins Integration Technologies, Inc. (Intek) +1 206 455 9935 DISCLAIMER: I could be wrong ... 1400 112th Ave SE #202 Bellevue WA 98004 uunet!intek01!mark Ask me about C++!
feg@clyde.ATT.COM (Forrest Gehrke,2C-119,7239,ATTBL) (02/26/90)
In article <48cc3c8b.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM>, nelson_p@apollo.HP.COM (Peter Nelson) writes: > I was quite nonplussed by some email I received from Walter Bright > on his BBS in Washington State in which he said that my criticism > of Zortech in a "public" and "insulting" manner was "not appreciated". > And that I should restrict my "public comments to polite requests > for help". > This was good advice from Walter. It was private to you. Why tell us about it? > perfectly legal C code or generate buggy results. The Zortech product has been > very well behaved. Most of my complaints about it from a technical view- > point are related to features it doesn't support such as a "huge" > memory model or 256 colors in 640X480 VGA. For most people these > would be minor or philosophical issues. > Your memory is a little short. Your original and loudest complaints were the result of failing to RTFM! Walter brought that failing to your attention. Now you are covering with minor squawks. Tell me what compiler doesn't have them, even after a half dozen releases, e.g. MSC V5.1? Forrest Gehrke feg@clyde.ATT.COM
schwartz@dinl.uucp (Michael Schwartz) (02/28/90)
<re: other PC products> I believe the author was referring to the major expense of both a C++ to C compiler, added to the cost of a C to object compiler. Zortech appears to have the competition beat by half ;-> Michael -- ----------------------- schwartz@pogo.den.mmc.com "Expect everything ... mschwartz@mmc.com and the unexpected never happens." ncar!dinl!schwartz --the phantom tollbooth DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressesed are not necessarily those of my employer or myself.