adnan@flammulated.rice.edu (Sarmad Adnan) (06/11/91)
I have been unable to compile the sample C programs in the IBM 1.3
toolkit using the MSC 6.0A compiler. Some of the include files seem
to be duplicated in the MSC include directory and the IBM toolkit
include directory. Has anyone run into this problem ?
-adnan
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sarmad Adnan (adnan@rice.edu)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~peterf@stovm1.vnet.ibm.com (Peter Forsberg) (06/11/91)
adnan@flammulated.rice.edu (Sarmad Adnan) writes: >Message-ID: <1991Jun10.183724.7718@rice.edu> >Date: 10 Jun 91 18:37:24 GMT > >I have been unable to compile the sample C programs in the IBM 1.3 >toolkit using the MSC 6.0A compiler. Some of the include files seem >to be duplicated in the MSC include directory and the IBM toolkit >include directory. Has anyone run into this problem ? > >-adnan > >-- I always have the 1.3 toolkit directories before the MS C ones in my LIB / INCLUDE paths, and it works for me. Of course you'll have to change MAKE to NMAKE if you use the CMD-files supplied to make the samples. Otherwise you can always make manually, I just tried the following command to make the Template sample: nmake -f template.mak template.hlp template.exe and it worked well (although I got a fair amount of warnings). / Peter -- Peter A. Forsberg Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden. IBM Sweden, Banking & Finance Applications. E-mail: peterf@stovm1.vnet.ibm.com (or d88-pfo@nada.kth.se) $include <standard.disclaimer>
cs_b144@ux.kingston.ac.uk (Ian Stickland) (06/12/91)
Ahh!! This reminds me!! When I first got my hands on the IBM 1.2 toolkit
I tried to compile one of the graphics samples using MS C6.0. I can't
remember if it was graphic1 or graphic2, but it's the one that allows you
to rearrange the shapes into two squares. Anyway it caused the complier to
crash with an internal error, always in the same place. Anyone else had
this problem??
When I contacted Microsoft about this they didn't want to know and tried
palming it off as an IBM problem which I don't think it is. As it was only
a sample program though I couldn't be bothered to sit through hours of
Jean Michelle Jarre and then try to explain the problem to someone who
hadn't even heard of OS/2 let alone the IBM toolkit.
I must try compiling the sample in the 1.3 toolkit. The result should be
similar I'd imagine, as the program probably hasn't changed much.
I'd be interested to know if anyone else can duplicate this problem, including
anyone from Microsoft who might be listening (whilst taking a break from the
on-line music).
Re the original problem, if you use the IBM toolkit you will need to delete
the MS C OS/2 include files which get dumped in the INCLUDE directory. These
will conflict with the IBM 1.3 files. Also another source of error msgs is that
Microsoft took it upon themselves to completely change the definition of NULL
from zero to a void pointer to null which causes code that compiled without
any warnings under previous versions of the compiler to generate pages of the
stuff under C6. This is why the IBM toolkit samples generate so many warnings
(or at least I HOPE that is the reason.) IF you have the patience a liberal
dose of casting will get rid of the warnings or you can just turn them off.
the samples still work, all except the one that causes the compiler to give up.
As a thought, with all these Microsoft adverts about 'The Hard Way' and the
'Microsoft way' just remember who invented the hard way... Yep good old
MICROSOFT.... What more needs to be said other than I really hope Borland
come up with the goods on the 32bit compiler front, and that means FULLY
re-entrant libraries, so then we can ditch MS completely.
Another satisfied MS customer...
Cheers, Ian Stickland.bking@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Barry King) (06/13/91)
> 'Microsoft way' just remember who invented the hard way... Yep good old > MICROSOFT.... What more needs to be said other than I really hope Borland > come up with the goods on the 32bit compiler front, and that means FULLY > re-entrant libraries, so then we can ditch MS completely. > > > Another satisfied MS customer... > > Cheers, Ian Stickland. My echo on those sentiments! I mean, I thank Microsft for allowing me the priviledge of shelling out major dollars for my OS/2 development goodies and all but Borland definitely has some good things going. As much as I despise all things Window-ish/DOS-ish, I purchased BC++ _and_ TPfW just to check them out. Hopefully Borland will have a generous upgrade (in the pure sense of the word) to the OS/2 2.0 versions. Barry King bking@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca Edmonton Remote Systems: Serving Northern Alberta since 1982