Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #151935 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2020-05-01 22:19 -0700 |
| Last post | 2020-05-18 13:25 +1200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 188 — 19 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-01 22:19 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-05-02 01:24 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-02 01:56 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-02 02:06 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment shi84516584@gmail.com - 2020-05-19 17:53 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-05-02 02:07 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-02 02:23 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment shi84516584@gmail.com - 2020-05-19 17:55 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2020-05-02 11:05 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-02 02:14 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2020-05-03 22:33 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-03 16:18 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2020-05-04 00:35 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-03 17:54 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-05-03 18:38 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-03 18:51 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-05-04 09:36 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment James Harris <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2020-05-04 08:48 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-04 01:12 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-05-04 15:16 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-04 06:21 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-05-04 15:40 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2020-05-04 07:12 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-05-04 14:47 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-04 07:08 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-04 08:12 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2020-05-05 11:36 -0500
Re: pure C90 environment James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2020-05-19 11:25 -0400
Re: pure C90 environment James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2020-05-19 11:39 -0400
Re: pure C90 environment Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2020-05-19 08:45 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-05-19 17:43 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2020-05-19 12:35 -0400
Re: pure C90 environment David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-05-19 20:14 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2020-05-19 14:42 -0400
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-19 12:11 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-05-19 21:46 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-19 13:11 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-05-19 14:39 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-05-19 13:24 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-05-20 09:26 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2020-05-19 21:11 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2020-05-19 18:51 -0400
Re: pure C90 environment antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2020-05-19 23:26 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-05-20 09:33 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-05-04 11:49 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-04 04:00 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-05-04 17:58 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-04 10:18 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-05-04 13:57 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-05-02 12:11 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-05-02 11:26 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-05-02 13:06 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2020-05-02 04:26 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-05-02 04:53 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-05-02 16:21 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-05-02 11:20 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-05-02 16:20 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2020-05-02 07:33 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-05-02 16:35 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-05-02 17:30 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-05-02 18:37 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-05-02 18:18 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-05-02 19:25 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-05-02 19:25 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-05-02 22:45 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-05-02 23:29 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-05-03 03:55 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-05-03 13:07 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-05-03 05:24 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2020-05-03 05:26 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-05-03 14:27 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-05-03 22:38 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-05-03 22:06 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-05-04 00:28 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2020-05-03 02:16 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2020-05-03 16:23 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-05-04 16:41 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-05-04 16:59 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2020-05-04 11:01 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-05-02 11:13 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-02 03:53 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-02 05:14 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-02 06:30 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-02 12:49 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2020-05-13 03:01 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-05-13 14:43 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-17 06:30 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-17 05:41 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2020-05-17 13:02 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-05-17 22:47 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-17 14:03 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-05-18 08:54 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-18 06:11 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2020-05-18 06:51 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-18 07:12 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-05-18 15:47 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2020-05-18 16:25 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-18 07:41 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2020-05-18 17:32 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-05-18 17:09 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-18 08:52 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-05-18 17:05 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-18 09:18 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-05-18 19:55 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-05-19 01:42 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-18 20:35 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-05-19 16:12 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-19 10:02 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-05-19 17:42 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-05-19 18:16 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-05-19 13:00 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-19 05:09 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-05-19 15:20 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-19 08:18 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-05-19 17:58 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-19 10:45 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-05-19 19:31 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-19 11:58 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-05-19 20:44 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-19 13:03 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2020-05-19 22:34 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-19 15:41 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-05-20 00:03 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-19 16:10 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-05-20 01:46 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-19 22:49 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-05-20 11:26 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-20 04:43 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-05-19 16:40 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2020-05-19 23:11 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-19 11:40 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-20 05:48 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-20 06:19 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-05-20 16:38 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-20 09:15 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-20 09:37 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-20 10:43 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2020-05-20 10:58 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-20 11:36 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-20 12:37 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment "muta...@gmail.com" <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 17:43 -0800
Re: pure C90 environment "muta...@gmail.com" <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 17:58 -0800
Re: pure C90 environment "muta...@gmail.com" <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 18:03 -0800
Re: pure C90 environment "muta...@gmail.com" <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 18:29 -0800
Re: pure C90 environment "muta...@gmail.com" <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 19:54 -0800
Re: pure C90 environment "muta...@gmail.com" <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 20:01 -0800
Re: pure C90 environment "muta...@gmail.com" <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 20:04 -0800
Re: pure C90 environment "muta...@gmail.com" <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 21:07 -0800
Re: pure C90 environment Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 23:10 -0800
Re: pure C90 environment "muta...@gmail.com" <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2021-03-11 01:21 -0800
Re: pure C90 environment scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-03-11 15:26 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-05-19 17:18 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-19 09:52 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-05-19 17:39 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-05-19 16:17 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-05-19 22:54 +0100
Re: pure C90 environment Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2020-05-20 10:17 +1200
Re: pure C90 environment Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2020-05-19 16:28 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-05-19 17:30 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2020-05-19 19:39 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2020-05-18 15:12 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-05-18 19:51 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-18 13:02 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2020-05-18 15:52 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-05-18 17:15 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2020-05-18 20:10 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-18 13:18 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2020-05-18 23:21 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-05-19 13:21 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-05-19 13:12 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-05-19 16:21 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-05-18 19:48 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-05-18 19:47 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-05-19 13:23 +0200
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-17 13:54 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2020-05-17 16:45 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-17 17:27 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2020-05-18 14:44 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-18 08:17 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2020-05-18 21:39 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-05-18 21:58 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-05-18 16:40 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-05-19 00:22 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2020-05-19 00:27 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-05-19 16:10 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2020-05-18 14:59 -0700
Re: pure C90 environment scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-05-18 20:01 +0000
Re: pure C90 environment Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2020-05-18 13:25 +1200
Page 7 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 Next page →
| From | antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-05-19 22:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ra1mts$5v8$1@z-news.wcss.wroc.pl> |
| In reply to | #152396 |
Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, 20 May 2020 04:32:08 UTC+10, Bart wrote:
>
> > Try:
> >
> > https://raw.githubusercontent.com/sal55/langs/master/cc32.c
>
> Thanks! I tried compiling that with gcc,
> and it successfully compiled, but the
> link failed with:
>
> /cygdrive/c/Users/kerra/AppData/Local/Temp/cc9yKkq0.o:orig.c:(.text+0x9d04): undefined reference to `SetConsoleCtrlHandler@12'
> /cygdrive/c/Users/kerra/AppData/Local/Temp/cc9yKkq0.o:orig.c:(.text+0x9e3e): undefined reference to `CreateProcessA@44'
> /cygdrive/c/Users/kerra/AppData/Local/Temp/cc9yKkq0.o:orig.c:(.text+0x9fbb): undefined reference to `CreateProcessA@44'
> /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-cygwin/4.8.2/../../../../i686-pc-cygwin/bin/ld: /cygdrive/c/Users/kerra/AppData/Local/Temp/cc9yKkq0.o: bad reloc address 0x0 in section `.data'
> /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-cygwin/4.8.2/../../../../i686-pc-cygwin/bin/ld: final link failed: Invalid operation
> collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
>
> regardless of whether I added -lkernel32 to
> the command line or not.
>
> I tried adding:
>
> #include <windows.h>
>
> to the code, but that gave conflicts, and
> also exposed a "bug" in micro-emacs in that
> it doesn't like a line of text 100k in size.
>
> BFN. Paul.
IIUC what Bart wrote, he compiled using MinGW gcc. MinGW gives you
directly access to Windows API. Cygwin is different: Cygwin emulates
Unix interface and you need to do something special to use
Windows API.
--
Waldek Hebisch
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-05-19 15:41 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <21f58d9f-06ba-4a4f-8435-1088551fc338@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #152408 |
On Wednesday, 20 May 2020 08:34:43 UTC+10, anti...@math.uni.wroc.pl wrote: > IIUC what Bart wrote, he compiled using MinGW gcc. MinGW gives you > directly access to Windows API. Cygwin is different: Cygwin emulates > Unix interface and you need to do something special to use > Windows API. Good thinking! However, I tried with both i686-pc-mingw32-gcc cc32.c and i686-w64-mingw32-gcc cc32.c and got the same link error. BFN. Paul.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-05-20 00:03 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <CBZwG.417256$dx4.78@fx05.am4> |
| In reply to | #152409 |
On 19/05/2020 23:41, Paul Edwards wrote:
> On Wednesday, 20 May 2020 08:34:43 UTC+10, anti...@math.uni.wroc.pl wrote:
>
>> IIUC what Bart wrote, he compiled using MinGW gcc. MinGW gives you
>> directly access to Windows API. Cygwin is different: Cygwin emulates
>> Unix interface and you need to do something special to use
>> Windows API.
>
> Good thinking! However, I tried with both
>
> i686-pc-mingw32-gcc cc32.c
>
> and
>
> i686-w64-mingw32-gcc cc32.c
>
> and got the same link error.
>
> BFN. Paul.
>
Cygwin is rather mysterious. If it has mingw, I don't know if that's the
same as the one running directly under Windows, which can link to
WinAPI, or one runs under Cygwin which uses Linux-like libraries.
But you can test with this program:
#include <windows.h>
int main(void) {
MessageBox(0,"World","Hello",0);
}
Under my mingw, this compiles with gcc like this:
gcc prog.c # compile prog.c to a.exe
and it should produce a pop-up window.
If it doesn't work with either of these lines in cygwin:
gcc prog.c
gcc prog.c -lgdi32 -luser32 -lkernel32
then it would explain the failure with cc32.c too.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-05-19 16:10 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <0b16a984-1764-4893-a51a-990e024d1201@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #152411 |
On Wednesday, 20 May 2020 09:04:12 UTC+10, Bart wrote: > But you can test with this program: > > Under my mingw, this compiles with gcc like this: > > gcc prog.c # compile prog.c to a.exe > > and it should produce a pop-up window. Your program works fine: C:\scratch\xxx6>i686-w64-mingw32-gcc prog.c C:\scratch\xxx6>a and produces the expected pop-up window. BFN. Paul.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-05-20 01:46 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <Q5%wG.593514$l01.7372@fx43.am4> |
| In reply to | #152412 |
On 20/05/2020 00:10, Paul Edwards wrote:
> On Wednesday, 20 May 2020 09:04:12 UTC+10, Bart wrote:
>
>> But you can test with this program:
>>
>> Under my mingw, this compiles with gcc like this:
>>
>> gcc prog.c # compile prog.c to a.exe
>>
>> and it should produce a pop-up window.
>
> Your program works fine:
>
> C:\scratch\xxx6>i686-w64-mingw32-gcc prog.c
>
> C:\scratch\xxx6>a
>
> and produces the expected pop-up window.
OK, so the problem is in my code. I think that is to do with the
definitions of SetConsoleCtrlHandler and CreateProcessA, which have a
mistake in one of the parameter types. (This is in the declarations in
my language of those Win32 functions, where I use 'int', which is 64
bits, but the correct BOOL type is 32 bits. That ends up in the C code.)
In 32-bit Windows, link symbols are 'decorated' with a size which is the
sum of the parameter sizes, so a suffix of '@8' became '@12', which did
not match anything in the library.
Anyway, I've updated the links.
(The OS-neutral version, where these functions are not used, should also
largely work, except for C input like this:
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void) {
puts(__DATE__);
puts(__TIME__);
}
where OS-functions are used to get these value rather than the C
runtime. In cc32n.c, those functions are no-ops. Not that it matters
much since no cc32*.c program can produce an executable.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-05-19 22:49 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <84708a6f-9329-43d4-86af-98ccd47afdfe@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #152416 |
On Wednesday, 20 May 2020 10:46:49 UTC+10, Bart wrote: > In 32-bit Windows, link symbols are 'decorated' with a size which is the > sum of the parameter sizes, so a suffix of '@8' became '@12', which did > not match anything in the library. > > Anyway, I've updated the links. cc32.c now builds correctly. The only issue is that if I do: cc32 -s world.c it produces a 0-byte "con" file as well, which I can't delete with the "del" command. I can delete it with "rm". I tried changing "con" to "con:" but then hit the micro-emacs bug with the 100k line. notepad was OK though. But then it created a file called conx, where x is a strange character. I tried making it "CON:" but that also gave me a file called CONx. The assembler was generated fine. BFN. Paul.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-05-20 11:26 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <NB7xG.291804$fD4.283638@fx09.am4> |
| In reply to | #152419 |
On 20/05/2020 06:49, Paul Edwards wrote:
> On Wednesday, 20 May 2020 10:46:49 UTC+10, Bart wrote:
>
>> In 32-bit Windows, link symbols are 'decorated' with a size which is the
>> sum of the parameter sizes, so a suffix of '@8' became '@12', which did
>> not match anything in the library.
>>
>> Anyway, I've updated the links.
>
> cc32.c now builds correctly.
>
> The only issue is that if I do:
>
> cc32 -s world.c
>
> it produces a 0-byte "con" file as well,
> which I can't delete with the "del"
> command. I can delete it with "rm".
This must be a peculiarity of the Cygwin subsystem.
The original language of cc32.c creates a 'file' called "con" in order
to obtain a file handle that can be used in a similar way to stdout in C
(used for logging output). Under Windows, "con" is not an actual filename.
Does the presence of that empty "con" file cause any problems? If "rm"
deletes it, then perhaps you can wrap bcc in a batch file or script to
remove it.
Or you can try "bcc -debug hello.c", but that will create a bunch of
stuff in bcc.log that you will have to delete instead.
Alternatively, change line 11211 of cc32.c:
return fopen((i8 *)((byte*)"con"),(i8 *)((byte*)"wb"));
to:
return 0;
and rebuild cc32.c. For a routine compile, no logging info is produced
so the handle is never used.
>
> I tried changing "con" to "con:" but then
> hit the micro-emacs bug with the 100k line.
I thought the file was empty?
> notepad was OK though. But then it created
> a file called conx, where x is a strange
> character. I tried making it "CON:" but
> that also gave me a file called CONx.
>
> The assembler was generated fine.
If hello.c works, try:
bcc -s cc32.c
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-05-20 04:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <39bc2b72-5308-4af1-bb0f-0414de5d1d3d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #152422 |
On Wednesday, 20 May 2020 20:27:05 UTC+10, Bart wrote: > Does the presence of that empty "con" file cause any problems? Not really. > > I tried changing "con" to "con:" but then > > hit the micro-emacs bug with the 100k line. > > I thought the file was empty? I meant I tried changing the cc32.c in case "con:" worked as a device, even though "con" was not. > If hello.c works, try: > > bcc -s cc32.c Yes, it works, a 3 MB assembler file! BFN. Paul.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-05-19 16:40 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <871rnfsdbv.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #152411 |
Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
[...]
> Cygwin is rather mysterious. If it has mingw, I don't know if that's
> the same as the one running directly under Windows, which can link to
> WinAPI, or one runs under Cygwin which uses Linux-like libraries.
>
> But you can test with this program:
>
> #include <windows.h>
>
> int main(void) {
> MessageBox(0,"World","Hello",0);
> }
On Cygwin, that works correctly (displaying the pop-up) when I compile
it with any of:
/usr/bin/gcc.exe
/usr/bin/i686-w64-mingw32-gcc.exe
/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-cygwin-gcc.exe
/usr/bin/x86_64-w64-mingw32-gcc.exe
(gcc.exe is a hard link to x86_64-pc-cygwin-gcc.exe.)
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for Philips Healthcare
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-05-19 23:11 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ra1p28$5v8$2@z-news.wcss.wroc.pl> |
| In reply to | #152409 |
Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, 20 May 2020 08:34:43 UTC+10, anti...@math.uni.wroc.pl wrote:
>
> > IIUC what Bart wrote, he compiled using MinGW gcc. MinGW gives you
> > directly access to Windows API. Cygwin is different: Cygwin emulates
> > Unix interface and you need to do something special to use
> > Windows API.
>
> Good thinking! However, I tried with both
>
> i686-pc-mingw32-gcc cc32.c
>
> and
>
> i686-w64-mingw32-gcc cc32.c
>
> and got the same link error.
Well, you need to link apropriate import libraries. Several years
ago I played with creating Windows executables on Linux, so I had
setup my build eviroment and specify exactly which import libraries
to use. Windows versions of gcc usualy come as an integrated
pack that is supposed to automaticaly link core import libraries.
Bart can say which version he uses, yours apparenty needs explicit
'-lsomething' (I do not remeber if 'kernel32' is right library).
Or maybe '-L...' to find directory with libraries.
--
Waldek Hebisch
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-05-19 11:40 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ae8fecac-df40-4a70-8358-4f065c8fc9c6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #152391 |
On Wednesday, 20 May 2020 03:46:01 UTC+10, Paul Edwards wrote: >> I don't get why, on this desert island, you have a fully working PC, but >> don't have a copy of Windows or Linux to run on it and >> at least get started. > > I guess it is like how they used to chuck > people off cliffs with artificial wings to > see if people were motivated enough to fly. > > I would like people to be stuck with PDOS > and have to fight their way out of any > restrictions such as no multitasking. It might not be PDOS they are stuck with. It might be a commercial derivative of PDOS which is closed source. Similar to how people were presented with MSDOS and needed to fight their way out of the single-tasking predicament. Note that on the mainframe I was writing a 32-bit version of PDPCLIB, and successfully got it to work on both AMODE 24 and AMODE 31. I didn't know anything about AMODE 64 at the time, but simply wondered what would happen if I ran it in AM64. To my surprise, the code mostly worked (even though, as I said, it was 32-bit code). I needed to change a couple of things, but mostly it simply worked. I then decided to make my software work on AM64 just for fun. I didn't see that it served any practical purpose. After some time, the enablement of AM64 allowed me to enable AM32, something unheard of in the IBM mainframe world. So my "thought experiments" on desert islands may not have any immediate benefit, but may be opening the door to other things that I haven't grasped yet. So I continue to just push the boundaries of public domain software to "see what happens". E.g. maybe the Vietnamese will take over the software industry once they have some sort of non-zero baseline to work from. And maybe the universe will collapse at that point. I don't know. BFN. Paul.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-05-20 05:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d4ca4407-7dca-4d2f-9408-730b4b59f139@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #152394 |
On Wednesday, 20 May 2020 04:41:08 UTC+10, Paul Edwards wrote: > >> I don't get why, on this desert island, you have a fully working PC, but > >> don't have a copy of Windows or Linux to run on it and > >> at least get started. > > It might not be PDOS they are stuck with. > It might be a commercial derivative of > PDOS which is closed source. What is the minimum amount of binary code that needs to be placed on an 80386-capable machine, so that you can build software, including a replacement compiler and operating system, using the C90 language? Minimizing the bootstrap requirements may be useful if you have to enter the machine code by hand. If we have to start from scratch, someone is going to need to use at least assembler code to create the compiler etc. What is required on the software side of things to restart civilization? What's the first thing that should be written? Write an assembler in machine code? Should we wait for 32-bit machines to be created or write an assembler on an 8-bit machine to target the 32-bit machine? The end goal is the desert island situation - minimum binary footprint to support C90 so that we can avoid assembler as much as possible. Also, we may have the source code corresponding to the desert island computer on printout, so that can be typed in to use as a base. Or the desert island people can have a fresh approach, it doesn't matter. So long as they can code in C90 instead of assembler. BFN. Paul.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-05-20 06:19 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <58d50535-cc85-4479-abcc-28f7b89a71db@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #152424 |
On Wednesday, 20 May 2020 22:48:55 UTC+10, Paul Edwards wrote: > Also, we may have the source code > corresponding to the desert island > computer on printout, so that can be > typed in to use as a base. Actually, I'm wondering if punched cards would be the most appropriate form of data storage, for both the binary and the source code. BFN. Paul.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-05-20 16:38 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <7acxG.479030$XN7.247815@fx01.am4> |
| In reply to | #152424 |
On 20/05/2020 13:48, Paul Edwards wrote: > On Wednesday, 20 May 2020 04:41:08 UTC+10, Paul Edwards wrote: > >>>> I don't get why, on this desert island, you have a fully working PC, but >>>> don't have a copy of Windows or Linux to run on it and >>>> at least get started. >> >> It might not be PDOS they are stuck with. >> It might be a commercial derivative of >> PDOS which is closed source. > > What is the minimum amount of binary code > that needs to be placed on an 80386-capable > machine, so that you can build software, > including a replacement compiler and > operating system, using the C90 language? > > Minimizing the bootstrap requirements > may be useful if you have to enter the > machine code by hand. > > If we have to start from scratch, someone > is going to need to use at least assembler > code to create the compiler etc. What is > required on the software side of things to > restart civilization? What's the first > thing that should be written? Write an > assembler in machine code? Should we wait > for 32-bit machines to be created or > write an assembler on an 8-bit machine > to target the 32-bit machine? The end > goal is the desert island situation - > minimum binary footprint to support C90 > so that we can avoid assembler as much > as possible. > > Also, we may have the source code > corresponding to the desert island > computer on printout, so that can be > typed in to use as a base. Or the > desert island people can have a fresh > approach, it doesn't matter. So long > as they can code in C90 instead of > assembler. If there's a printout, then why not a printout of a hex dump of the program. Then it just needs to be keyed in; no compiler needed. Although you would start with more basic utilities rather than a full compiler, library, and whatever else is needed to get going. In that case, however, you have to think about why you can't have the machine code in the form of a ready-to-load executable on some form of storage media. (Or maybe that is the next step: the first program is one to read from such media.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-05-20 09:15 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ecaf7ca7-8930-4e3e-bec2-d5a403a8f868@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #152427 |
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 01:38:52 UTC+10, Bart wrote: > In that case, however, you have to think about why you can't have the > machine code in the form of a ready-to-load executable on some form of > storage media. (Or maybe that is the next step: the first program is one > to read from such media.) Yes, I'm thinking that the minimal binaries should be punched to punched cards, and you can either build a machine to read punched cards, or you can type them in by hand. The punched cards can be stored in the same place as the Dead Sea Scrolls were stored, to survive civilizational collapse. The source code can also be stored on punched cards, but that's not so important, as I expect people to sit down and produce a much better operating system and compiler than is provided on the punched cards. But at least they can write it in C. It might be worth providing a hex dump of the binary, and the source, on microfiche as well, as plastic should last even longer, and people will hopefully be able to figure out how to read it. BFN. Paul.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-05-20 09:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <2e1fdf46-e4e2-498a-8886-7686ded95d86@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #152428 |
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 02:15:32 UTC+10, Paul Edwards wrote: > The punched cards can be stored in the same > place as the Dead Sea Scrolls were stored, > to survive civilizational collapse. I also wonder whether there is a mechanism available to transmit computer technology to aliens on Alpha Centauri who do not have a concept of computers, but do have radios. That problem may be a bit too hard for now, but I'm still interested in getting pure C90 systems set up, probably a self-hosting environment for multiple processors. I'm wondering whether there can be a common hardware platform that allows different CPUs to be slotted in. The C compiler itself can have multiple backends. BFN. Paul.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-05-20 10:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <0755171c-a488-440a-90ef-acba132d3913@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #152429 |
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 02:37:37 UTC+10, Paul Edwards wrote: > I also wonder whether there is a mechanism > available to transmit computer technology > to aliens on Alpha Centauri who do not have > a concept of computers, but do have radios. Note that I am doing something similar to this already. The 80386 is not the only thing I am programming for. I am also compiling programs on IBM mainframes. But I don't interact with the IBM mainframe via a screen. I instead zip up all my source code and send it up via virtual tape, and get the result back via virtual printer. So I will edit source code on my PC and then typically type in "allmvs" and then wait a while for my command prompt to return, then I open output.txt in micro-emacs to see what happened. Other mainframers think this behavior is odd. But I'm preparing for the day when I get the folks on Alpha Centauri to do the compiles, and I just transmit a zip file. I have something similar in mind for a rerun of 1991. You just need one rich person with 32 MiB of RAM and a BBS who is willing to do compiles on your behalf, and it doesn't matter than you are using a machine without VM, running GCC 3.2.3 which requires something like 20 MiB to rebuild itself. I am trying to lock in the 1991 technology so that I can go *both* backwards and forwards from there, so that I can give sound advice to the folk on Alpha Centauri on how to kickstart the computer industry. Although I admit I still only have a vague sense of what I am trying to achieve. I'm a big fan of standards though, and it was a relief to me when the ISO committee finally signed off on the C standard so that we had a universal language for computers, and all we needed to do was "go forth and multiply". BFN. Paul.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-05-20 10:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <69dd629c-fc36-4277-884b-0f7ef8c62a47@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #152430 |
On Wednesday, 20 May 2020 20:43:55 UTC+3, Paul Edwards wrote: > On Thursday, 21 May 2020 02:37:37 UTC+10, Paul Edwards wrote: > > > I also wonder whether there is a mechanism > > available to transmit computer technology > > to aliens on Alpha Centauri who do not have > > a concept of computers, but do have radios. > > Note that I am doing something similar to > this already. The 80386 is not the only > thing I am programming for. I am also > compiling programs on IBM mainframes. But > I don't interact with the IBM mainframe > via a screen. I instead zip up all my > source code and send it up via virtual > tape, and get the result back via virtual > printer. > > So I will edit source code on my PC and > then typically type in "allmvs" and then > wait a while for my command prompt to > return, then I open output.txt in > micro-emacs to see what happened. Other > mainframers think this behavior is odd. > > But I'm preparing for the day when I > get the folks on Alpha Centauri to do > the compiles, and I just transmit a > zip file. Distance to Alpha Gentauri is about 4.367 light years. So about 8 years and 9 months to wait for a response from there. > > I have something similar in mind for a > rerun of 1991. You just need one rich > person with 32 MiB of RAM and a BBS who > is willing to do compiles on your > behalf, and it doesn't matter than you > are using a machine without VM, running > GCC 3.2.3 which requires something like > 20 MiB to rebuild itself. > > I am trying to lock in the 1991 technology > so that I can go *both* backwards and > forwards from there, so that I can give > sound advice to the folk on Alpha > Centauri on how to kickstart the > computer industry. > > Although I admit I still only have a vague > sense of what I am trying to achieve. I'm > a big fan of standards though, and it was > a relief to me when the ISO committee > finally signed off on the C standard so > that we had a universal language for > computers, and all we needed to do was > "go forth and multiply". > > BFN. Paul. If you want to kick start next civilization after this one suicides then better engrave your wisdom onto obsidian. It can take hundreds of millions of years for sentient enough species to evolve again.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-05-20 11:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <70082ffa-5325-494b-a152-1509829fc816@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #152431 |
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 03:59:03 UTC+10, Öö Tiib wrote: > > But I'm preparing for the day when I > > get the folks on Alpha Centauri to do > > the compiles, and I just transmit a > > zip file. > > Distance to Alpha Gentauri is about 4.367 light years. > So about 8 years and 9 months to wait for a response > from there. "allmvs" may be channeled through a wormhole, I really have no idea (nor care) what happens when I press enter. Or time could be distorted. It's the principle of programming by offloading stuff into the void to be built on an alien system (MVS in this case, but in 1991 it might have been a BBS run by someone who could afford 32 MiB of RAM and was willing to take compile requests). > If you want to kick start next civilization after this one > suicides then better engrave your wisdom onto obsidian. > It can take hundreds of millions of years for sentient > enough species to evolve again. Ok, volcanic rock, thanks for the tip. Another possibility I just thought of is that the folks at Alpha Centauri could transmit the software back to Earth. Potentially with the addition of "wtf?". BFN. Paul.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-05-20 12:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4d78e06d-e97b-41e0-9f9a-0b724b3bab25@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #152432 |
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 04:36:35 UTC+10, Paul Edwards wrote: > Or time could be distorted. It's the > principle of programming by offloading > stuff into the void to be built on an > alien system (MVS in this case, but Note that when I post messages into comp.lang.c they similarly go off into the void, and I get replies back, almost by magic. The posters claim to be on Earth, but from my perspective I don't know whether they are Alpha Centaurians communicating across a wormhole. Note that various ideas "pop into my head" too, and I have no idea whether my subconscious is actually a wormhole to some Alpha Centaurian. And I wonder what happens if this newsgroup is received by said Alpha Centaurian. Do I get an opportunity to communicate with my subconscious via newsgroup, closing a loop? I also wonder whether I'm the only person who isn't "in on it", and I provide endless entertainment to the folks at Alpha Centauri as I struggle to figure out how the universe is configured. BFN. Paul.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web