Re: Cross platform code

2003-07-06 Thread Oron Peled
On Fri, 4 Jul 2003 15:42:29 +0300 (IDT) guy keren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: regarding compiling it - it comes with configurations that work on various platforms (the last two we tried were redhat linux 7.3 and windows + vc++ 6.0) - so it might be not that hard to compile, after all. it used

Re: Cross platform code

2003-07-05 Thread Shlomi Fish
On Sat, 5 Jul 2003, Vadim Vygonets wrote: Quoth Oleg Goldshmidt on Fri, Jul 04, 2003: [snip snip] So portable in the Java/Python/etc sense means *portable across a limited, albeit maybe wide enough, range of platforms*. This is a very different notion of portability than that of, say, ISO

Re: Cross platform code

2003-07-05 Thread Oleg Goldshmidt
Vadim Vygonets [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Quoth Oleg Goldshmidt on Fri, Jul 04, 2003: [snip snip] So portable in the Java/Python/etc sense means *portable across a limited, albeit maybe wide enough, range of platforms*. This is a very different notion of portability than that of, say, ISO

Re: Cross platform code

2003-07-05 Thread Vadim Vygonets
Quoth Shlomi Fish on Sat, Jul 05, 2003: The PalmOS SDK is based on gcc. I don't know if it supports all the ANSI C functions, but I think it does. I don't think hello.c will work on PalmOS as is. Vadik. -- Of course [nobody reads the docs that come with the OS] -- that would be too easy and

Re: Cross platform code

2003-07-05 Thread Vadim Vygonets
Quoth Oleg Goldshmidt on Sat, Jul 05, 2003: Vadim Vygonets [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Quoth Oleg Goldshmidt on Fri, Jul 04, 2003: [snip snip] So portable in the Java/Python/etc sense means *portable across a limited, albeit maybe wide enough, range of platforms*. This is a very

Re: Cross platform code

2003-07-04 Thread Shlomi Fish
On Thu, 3 Jul 2003, Eliran Gonen wrote: Voguemaster [EMAIL PROTECTED]: For the life of me, I can't seem to find anything that will help me write code that can compile under Linux AND Win32. Basically I want to write a small network application (details later) that will be cross platform.

Re: Cross platform code

2003-07-04 Thread Eliran Gonen
Shlomi Fish [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Python is your friend. http://www.python.org Or Perl - http://www.cpan.org/. Or Ruby... There's no need to discriminate against languages. It was just an example. Generally, interpreted languages are doing quite a good job when it comes to portability.

Re: Cross platform code

2003-07-04 Thread Voguemaster
On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 12:03:26 +0300, Eliran Gonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shlomi Fish [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Python is your friend. http://www.python.org Or Perl - http://www.cpan.org/. Or Ruby... There's no need to discriminate against languages. It was just an example. Generally, interpreted

Re: Cross platform code

2003-07-04 Thread Eliran Gonen
Voguemaster [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Well actually, if I wanted to save myself the headache I would have done it in Java :) Bytecode languages and other interpreted languages are usually *FASTER* than Java. Extremely easy to develop, I just love that language. There is only one major drawback

Re: Cross platform code

2003-07-04 Thread Alexander Maryanovsky
Well actually, if I wanted to save myself the headache I would have done it in Java :) Extremely easy to develop, I just love that language. There is only one major drawback which annoys me and that's speed. This application I'm writing has to be able to handle many requests per second if need

Re: Cross platform code

2003-07-04 Thread Shachar Shemesh
Oleg Goldshmidt wrote: [1] One can say that the advantage of Java for the programmer lies in the lack of a superset of the spec that includes implementation dependent and other non-standard stuff, so the programmer does not have to think, is this statement portable? all the time. This is

Cross platform code

2003-07-03 Thread Voguemaster
Hi all, For the life of me, I can't seem to find anything that will help me write code that can compile under Linux AND Win32. Basically I want to write a small network application (details later) that will be cross platform. The problem is very basic: Linux and Win32 have different include files

Re: Cross platform code

2003-07-03 Thread Beni Cherniavsky
Voguemaster wrote on 2003-07-03: Hi all, For the life of me, I can't seem to find anything that will help me write code that can compile under Linux AND Win32. Basically I want to write a small network application (details later) that will be cross platform. The problem is very basic:

Re: Cross platform code

2003-07-03 Thread Omer Zak
On Thu, 3 Jul 2003, Voguemaster wrote: The problem is very basic: Linux and Win32 have different include files for some things and placing #include directives inside #ifdef doesn't do the trick (it nullifies the #ifdef possibly ?). Very strange. I'm not sure how to go about this and I

Re: Cross platform code

2003-07-03 Thread Eliran Gonen
Voguemaster [EMAIL PROTECTED]: For the life of me, I can't seem to find anything that will help me write code that can compile under Linux AND Win32. Basically I want to write a small network application (details later) that will be cross platform. Python is your friend.

Re: Cross platform code

2003-07-03 Thread Nadav Har'El
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003, Voguemaster wrote about Cross platform code: The problem is very basic: Linux and Win32 have different include files for some things and placing #include directives inside #ifdef doesn't do the trick (it nullifies the #ifdef possibly ?). You probably made some mistake

Re: Cross platform code

2003-07-03 Thread Christoph Bugel
On 2003-07-03 Voguemaster wrote: The problem is very basic: Linux and Win32 have different include files for some things and placing #include directives inside #ifdef doesn't do the trick (it nullifies the #ifdef possibly ?). What exactly is not working? For me it always worked just fine

Re: Cross platform code

2003-07-03 Thread Gilboa Davara
Better yet: #ifdef unix // UNIX/Linux/*BSD. #endif #ifdef _WIN32 // Window stuff #endif Both symbols are auto defined by the compiler. Gilboa On Thu, 2003-07-03 at 18:48, Nadav Har'El wrote: On Thu, Jul 03, 2003, Voguemaster wrote about Cross platform code: The problem is very basic

Re: Cross platform code

2003-07-03 Thread shtirlitz
Quoting Omer Zak [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Thu, 3 Jul 2003, Voguemaster wrote: The problem is very basic: Linux and Win32 have different include files for some things and placing #include directives inside #ifdef doesn't do the trick (it nullifies the #ifdef possibly ?). as a good

Re: Cross platform code

2003-07-03 Thread Oleg Goldshmidt
Gilboa Davara [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Better yet: #ifdef unix // UNIX/Linux/*BSD. #endif #ifdef _WIN32 // Window stuff #endif Both symbols are auto defined by the compiler. What is the compiler? How can you be sure that 6 months from now someone in New Zealand will be

Re: Cross platform code

2003-07-03 Thread Gilboa Davara
CPP/GCC/CC all define _WIN32 by default under all the environment I ever worked on. (which is pretty extensive.) By design, compilers running under Windows (be that Watcom, Borland or MCVC) must define _WINTVER, _WIN32 and M_IX86/M_ALPA/etc in-order to include the Winxxx.h files. (which are

Re: Cross platform code

2003-07-03 Thread Gilboa Davara
I should add that you can always use your own macro (defined inside your makes files) in-case you don't want to count on the compiler doing the work for you. E.g. ifdef _WINNT_ #include windows.h #endif #ifdef _LINUX_ #include unistd.h #include pthread.h #include signal.h #include

Re: Cross platform code

2003-07-03 Thread Shachar Shemesh
Just two more inputs to the bunch of very good answers already provided. 1. If you are using C++, there is a library called ACE that provides a platform independant wrapper for TCP communications, as well as some shortcuts. You might want to check it out. I have never worked with it, but I

Re: Cross platform code

2003-07-03 Thread Oleg Goldshmidt
Gilboa Davara [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: CPP/GCC/CC all define _WIN32 by default under all the environment I ever worked on. (which is pretty extensive.) Really? Right now I am in an environment where several different version of cpp and gcc don't define that. It seems to me that the range of