rhealey@ub.d.umn.edu (Rob Healey) (02/27/89)
Has anyone ever gotton Elm to work on a PDP-11? It must be possible since it'll run on '286's. I've tried getting it to compile under 2.9 BSD but it has a few problems: 1) 7 character limit on compiler/assembler. OK, we use shortnames. Hey guys! The shortnames file is at least 250 symbols off in 2.1! My hands got tired adding all the symbols... OK, so now we've got all those long symbols fixed up. Along comes problem #2. 2) Field names in structures are duplicated in different structures. I.e. struct foo has a bar and so does struct kludge. Since my hands still hurt from adding in all the shortnames stuff I gave up on renaming all the structures. So, has any brave and fearless soul out there ever gotton ANY version of Elm to go on a PDP-11? For the uninitiated the PDP-11 has 64K instruction and 64K Data with overlays possible if your into pain... For you purists out there, yes I KNOW about the difference betwixed Split I/D and non-split I/D. There's NO WAY Elm could run on non Split I/D so I'm not gunna ask... Any help would be appreciated. For you developers you might want to update shortnames.h and company, it is WAY behind the current code. -Rob Healey rhealey@ub.d.umn.edu
syd@dsinc.UUCP (Syd Weinstein) (02/27/89)
In article <780@umn-d-ub.D.UMN.EDU> rhealey@ub.d.umn.edu (Rob Healey) writes: > Hey guys! The shortnames file is at least 250 symbols off in > 2.1! My hands got tired adding all the symbols... OK, so now > we've got all those long symbols fixed up. The shortnames files in Elm 2.2 at least say at the top, This file is obsolete and provided for reference only. The Elm development group is not attempting to keep the short identifiers working. Due to how fast Elm changes, and the few systems out there with short identifiers. There is a PD program called shortc that will automatically convert the identifiers for you making up the file. Someone just told me about it, but I have never used it. No one on the Elm group has a system that requires short identifiers which makes it tougher to test that feature. Also, if your system is that old, many other features will also be missing making Elm harder to install. Elm 2.2 will not contain valid shortnames files either. -- ===================================================================== Sydney S. Weinstein, CDP, CCP Elm Coordinator Datacomp Systems, Inc. Voice: (215) 947-9900 {allegra,bpa,vu-vlsi}!dsinc!syd FAX: (215) 938-0235
pja@ralph.UUCP (Pete Alleman) (03/01/89)
In article <780@umn-d-ub.D.UMN.EDU> rhealey@ub.d.umn.edu (Rob Healey) writes: > > Has anyone ever gotton Elm to work on a PDP-11? It must be possible > since it'll run on '286's. I've tried getting it to compile under > 2.9 BSD but it has a few problems: I had similar experiences trying to get it to run on a UNIX V7 system. I would like to strongly encourage anyone writing C to be run on a variety of machine to run lint with portability checks turned on (lint -p). The majority of all code posted on Usenet fails to pass lint. The output of "lint -p" is usually larger than the source code. The tools are there, why not use them??? -- Pete Alleman ralph!pja or digitran!pja