1. EGCS (off-topic, sort of)
With all the talk of a Euphoria to C compiler/translator, I was wondering =
if anybody has had success/experience with GCC's latest incarnation as =
EGCS. My attempts to use it have found the regular include files missing, =
and the linuxinc.tgz package to be missing stdio.h and stdlib.h among =
other widely used includes. Does anybody have a different story or an URL =
containing *all* the includes?
Michael J. Sabal
2. Re: EGCS (off-topic, sort of)
EU>Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 14:07:03 -0400
EU>Sender: Euphoria Programming for MS-DOS <EUPHORIA at LISTSERV.
EU>MUOHIO.EDU>
EU>With all the talk of a Euphoria to C compiler/translator, I was
EU>wondering if anybody has had success/experience with GCC's latest
EU>incarnation as EGCS. My attempts to use it have found the regular
EU>include files missing, and the linuxinc.tgz package to be missing
EU>stdio.h and stdlib.h among other widely used includes. Does
EU>anybody have a different story or an URL containing *all* the
EU>includes?
EU>Michael J. Sabal
You might also ask whether anyone knows of a 32-bit C compiler that
uses the standard C syntax , a seemless memory arrangement ; beyond
640k ,and supports Svga.
That occupies 1Mbyte or less of disk space.
This appears to be a rare critter indeed.
Mention has been made somewhere of a Personal C Compiler.
Net-Tamer V 1.11 - Test Drive
3. Re: EGCS (off-topic, sort of)
> That occupies 1Mbyte or less of disk space.
> This appears to be a rare critter indeed.
Why do you care that it occupies less than 1M?
4. Re: EGCS (off-topic, sort of)
----- Original Message -----
From: "R. W. D." <filexfer3 at JUNO.COM>
To: <EUPHORIA at LISTSERV.MUOHIO.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2000 4:10 PM
Subject: Re: EGCS (off-topic, sort of)
> > That occupies 1Mbyte or less of disk space.
> > This appears to be a rare critter indeed.
>
> Why do you care that it occupies less than 1M?
I care cause of the trend to code bloat. I expect it's possible in 20 yrs, a
beginner's "hello world" program will need 5megs for itself and a 2gig OS to
run,, and prolly some 16MP-2Ghz puter. I could put my old C64 (1Mhz with 32K
of free 500ns ram) up against the 586-133 (133Mhz with 12meg of 60ns ram)
running win95 any time, and the C64 would redraw it's windows faster every
time. You know MS recommends you get 64Megs of ram minimum to run Win2000,
plus 64Meg for the applications? That's 64,000 times more memory than my
first computer.
Kat
5. Re: EGCS (off-topic, sort of)
----- Original Message -----
From: Kat <gertie at ZEBRA.NET>
.....
> I care cause of the trend to code bloat. I expect it's possible in 20 yrs,
a
> beginner's "hello world" program will need 5megs for itself and a 2gig OS
to
> run,, and prolly some 16MP-2Ghz puter. I could put my old C64 (1Mhz with
32K
> of free 500ns ram) up against the 586-133 (133Mhz with 12meg of 60ns ram)
> running win95 any time, and the C64 would redraw it's windows faster every
> time. You know MS recommends you get 64Megs of ram minimum to run Win2000,
> plus 64Meg for the applications? That's 64,000 times more memory than my
> first computer.
Kat, you're right, but I think it will be less than 5 years.
M$'s efforts seem to be geared toward "forcing" the purchase of
new more powerful computer equipment every one or two years just to
maintain the level of performance we have become accustomed to.
On the other hand, I'll bet those C64 "Hello World" programs didn't have
hidden
flight simulators and shirtless jpegs of Bill G. How can we go back to plain
old
"Hello World" after we've seen those?
Regards,
Irv
6. Re: EGCS (off-topic, sort of)
EU>Date: Sat, 6 May 2000 17:10:08 EDT
EU>Sender: Euphoria Programming for MS-DOS <EUPHORIA at LISTSERV.
EU>MUOHIO.EDU>
EU>> That occupies 1Mbyte or less of disk space.
EU>> This appears to be a rare critter indeed.
EU>Why do you care that it occupies less than 1M?
There are a number of reasons, one being the desire to have a portable
and fairly standard software development core.
Some developers were actually surprised for instance when they found that
software might be written for micro-controllers using C.
Since then Borland and others have grown oaks from the original acorns,
in their own grounds. I'd like to have a robust acorn that I might plant
myself, in my own software environment.
With 32-bit capabilities becoming more realiable and some , though still
not enough , standardization at the C code level the situation should
improve.
I'd like to see this made available then , freely , to everyone ; at a
dedicated web-site.
In the meanwhile languages like Euphoria bridge the gap in their own way.
Net-Tamer V 1.11 - Test Drive
7. Re: EGCS (off-topic, sort of)
- Posted by "R. W. D." <filexfer3 at JUNO.COM>
May 06, 2000
-
Last edited May 07, 2000
>Kat, you're right, but I think it will be less than 5 years.
Three.
>On the other hand, I'll bet those C64 "Hello World" >programs didn't
have hidden
>flight simulators and shirtless jpegs of Bill G.
There's a dream come true.
>How can we go back to plain old
>"Hello World" after we've seen those?
Rapidly.
8. Re: EGCS (off-topic, sort of)
Beaumont Furniss wrote:
> With 32-bit capabilities becoming more realiable and some , though still
> not enough , standardization at the C code level the situation should
> improve.
> I'd like to see this made available then , freely , to everyone ; at a
> dedicated web-site.
Have you looked at DJGPP? http://www.delorie.com/djgpp/
> In the meanwhile languages like Euphoria bridge the gap in their own
way.
