From: dc606 AT freenet DOT carleton DOT ca (A. Valente) Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c Subject: Re: DJGPP reserves wrong int size Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 17:01:30 -0400 Organization: National Capital Freenet, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Lines: 82 Sender: dc606 AT freenet DOT carleton DOT ca (A. Valente) Message-ID: <3B438429.3F59738C@ncf.ca> References: <9dde68b7 DOT 0106241053 DOT 2a385311 AT posting DOT google DOT com> <3b37e7cc DOT 288391695 AT news DOT primus DOT ca> <3b3b4b39 DOT 212640295 AT news DOT primus DOT ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: p12t4.std.dialup.ncf.carleton.ca Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: freenet9.carleton.ca 994280345 11332 134.117.137.43 (4 Jul 2001 20:59:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: complaints AT ncf DOT ca NNTP-Posting-Date: 4 Jul 2001 20:59:05 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en X-Given-From: A & R To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com test Graaagh the Mighty wrote: > On Tue, 26 Jun 2001 23:05:45 +0100, Mark McIntyre > sat on a tribble, which squeaked: > > >On Tue, 26 Jun 2001 01:42:23 GMT, invalid AT erehwon DOT invalid (Graaagh the > >Mighty) wrote: > > > >>>Note that you are asking questions about compiler implementation internals that > >>>are off topic in comp.lang.c. > >> > >>I fail to see how that is relevant in comp.os.msdos.djgpp. > > > >because this was crossposted to many groups. So he gets an answer > >relevant to that group. Its always worth reading the group list. > > The group list, as displayed by Free Agent, was "comp.os.msdos.djgpp". > (It appears in the window title when an article is being viewed. The > title changes to the subject line when writing an article.) > > Don't, by the way, suggest I use another news reader. The alternatives > make my skin crawl. One comes from Microsoft. Netscape's regularly > hangs the OS. The only remaining free ones for Windoze I am aware of > are crummy ports of Unix ones, and get the worst of both worlds, as > they use the crappy Windoze interface but don't stick to its standards > and you need a degree in rocket science and advanced linear algebra in > order to so much as configure them to talk to your ISP's news server, > let alone actually subscribe a group and read 1 article from it. > > (DJGPP, fortunately, doesn't get "the worst of both worlds", although > RSXNTDJ did during its heyday. It is no more rocket science than any > other C compiler out there -- arguably the snazzy commercial ones are > worse for that because they hide some of the process and then fail in > obscure ways you don't know how to fix, and then you don't have a > newsgroup for support, you have their hugely expensive "toll-free" > number. And it doesn't pretend to be a Windoze program, nor does it > need a GUI to be used effectively. Unlike, say, your editor, or your > newsreader, where you want to have multiple windows open at once and > to be able to navigate visually rather than by the usual process of > "hit the eight bucky keys and the other key, frantically escape out of > the unfamiliar prompt, go to the help file, try to read it, try to get > out of the help browser, fail, try to find the section of the help > file about exiting the help browser, hit the eight bucky keys and the > other key...") > > >The result of the COMPILATION is some translated text which may be an > >object module, or may be a hippo. ISO doesn't define that. > > If so, they made a rather large oversight, since that means I can call > my program that occasionally reboots the machine and otherwise > generates pretty Mandelbrot fractals "an ANSI C Compiler" and nobody > can prove me wrong... All I have to do is make it able to read a > source file, and proceed to generate a Mandelbrot fractal (or, > perhaps, reboot the machine)... > > >The result of your PROGRAM is the output. As a C programmer you should > >care about the latter, not the former. > > The result of that includes its speed of execution and its memory > requirements, and that gets to the heart of the matter the original > poster was questioning. > > >(In CLC, the result of a program is pretty much defined by ISO as > >being the output. Who cares what the compiler produces ? thats > >implementation specific stuff.) > > Well, if the compiler doesn't actually produce object code that runs > as the program on the CPU involved, I'd become a tad concerned. > > >Could be, but ANSI/ISO don't care and nor should the OP. > > I hate to burst your theoretical bubble, but programmers can and will > care about the code speed and memory requirements, and this isn't even > wrong. Why, otherwise, do they make *optimizers*? > -- > Bill Gates: "No computer will ever need more than 640K of RAM." -- 1980 > "There's nobody getting rich writing software that I know of." -- 1980 > "This antitrust thing will blow over." -- 1998 > Combine neo, an underscore, and one thousand sixty-one to make my hotmail addy.