> Mike Davis writes:
> > All of these questions assume staying with GCC.
> >
> > 1) How do I verify which OS version is being used? There is no
> > version listed in the include files.
>
> In prc-tools, by whether the directory is .../include/PalmOS2/... or
> .../include/PalmOS3/... Having asked that question, you should now
> expect email from David Fedor saying "what is it that you really want to
> know?" :-). And that's very reasonable I think -- MacOS spent years
> inventing Gestalt when it became clear that "what OS version is it?" was
> not the right way to go.
my include file is just: .../include/PalmOS/ There is nothing
indicating the version.
I'm not speaking of "what OS version..." in terms of an app determing
that. I am just trying to see how my development environment is
configured. I suspect that it's still setup for OS 2.0 and I and
reconsidering if I should stay with 2.0 headers or 3.0.
> There's some discussion of this sort of thing in prc-tools starting at
>
> http://www.acm.rpi.edu/~albert/pilot/Sep98/0124.html
>
> > 2) Is that a reasonalble way to go?
>
> Unfortunately, I think it's becoming less reasonable. Current versions of
> prc-tools include separate copies of v1, v2, and v3 includes. (Okay, the
> v3 ones aren't there, but in practice you can just add them in parallel.)
> This is becoming less and less maintainable: I'm making major changes in
> the compiler and in the Palm OS header files for the upcoming prc-tools
> release, and it's going to be a major pain to duplicate those changes in
> the old header files.
>
> (Should we be talking gcc-specific stuff on this list when we have
> pilot.programmer.gcc? Hey, why not, there's plenty of CodeWarrior-
> specific talk here... :-))
>
> > 3) Is there a good reason to switch to using OS 3.x include files?
>
> Just as assuming OS 2 instead of OS 1 gave you PrintF, assuming various
> incarnations of OS 3 gives you all sorts of goodies... Oh, but that's an
> answer to "switch to OS 3.x", and you asked "switch to OS 3.x includes".
>
> Okay. More to the point, these are, I imagine, the only ones that are
> supported by Palm. This means that the old ones are going to atrophy (and
> they already are -- cf the pain in using floating point with gcc and os2
> includes).
>
> > 4) I assume, that with GCC, this just means copying new header files
> > to the System, UI, and Hardware to upgrade from 2.0 to 3.x. Or
> > are there other files that need to be moved from the SDK to the
> > GCC file area?
>
> If you're doing simple stuff, that's it. "Simple stuff" basically
> means "not networking" -- see the recent pilot.programmer.gcc thread
> entitled "berkeley net api - missing files".
>
> > 5) Anything else I should understand in making a decision on which
> > OS version to develope for?
>
> There are more political issues than technical issues I think. (ie,
> "Is it more important to allow Palm III to beam or to support people
> with Palm Pilots -- oh, but if I work a little harder as a developer
> I can do both" is a political issue.) And in fact, we've talked about
> this one before on this list, so there should be some interesting data in
> the archives.
>
> John
>
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Discussion Group: http://www.halcyon.com/ipscone/wwwboard/
Protect your constitutional rights. Your favorite one may be next!
-----------------------------------------------------------------
