1. RE: Wrapping C -- errno's?
> From: Andy Serpa [mailto:renegade at earthling.net]
> Are basic error numbers (like EINVAL or EEXISTS) returned from C
> functions the same from compiler to compiler? Is there a standard or
> are they all different?
Many are standard errors, and many are library/application specific. Find
the header file that defines them. The first place you might look is in
winerror.h. I usually do a search in Explorer for text in files using
"#define ERRORNAME".
Matt Lewis
PS Didn't check my email this weekend, but looks like you solved your
callback problem, right?
2. RE: Wrapping C -- errno's?
Matthew Lewis wrote:
>
> > From: Andy Serpa [mailto:renegade at earthling.net]
>
> > Are basic error numbers (like EINVAL or EEXISTS) returned from C
> > functions the same from compiler to compiler? Is there a standard or
> > are they all different?
>
> Many are standard errors, and many are library/application specific.
> Find
> the header file that defines them. The first place you might look is in
> winerror.h. I usually do a search in Explorer for text in files using
> "#define ERRORNAME".
>
> Matt Lewis
>
> PS Didn't check my email this weekend, but looks like you solved your
> callback problem, right?
>
Yeah, I got the errno.h file from the compiler that made the .dll I'm
working with.
As far as callbacks, I solved it using the method described a few
messages ago (Re:Callback problem), but you might want to take a look at
your func_asm in fptr.e -- seems to call the function ok but not always
exit properly, but I'm not qualified to comment. (If I call those same
functions that were crashing myself via call_cdecl_func they don't
crash, by the way, just when they are called from the .dll.)
I am still using your library for the rest of the calls as they are all
object methods (& cdecl) and there is no other way to call them than by
reference, so big thanks to you for that...
3. RE: Wrapping C -- errno's?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andy Serpa [mailto:ac at onehorseshy.com]
>
> Matthew Lewis wrote:
> As far as callbacks, I solved it using the method described a few
> messages ago (Re:Callback problem), but you might want to
> take a look at
> your func_asm in fptr.e -- seems to call the function ok but
> not always
> exit properly, but I'm not qualified to comment. (If I call
> those same
> functions that were crashing myself via call_cdecl_func they don't
> crash, by the way, just when they are called from the .dll.)
Do you know what compiler compiled the dll? As I recall, I only really
tested using MSVC6. I wonder if the compiler is using some sort of fastcall
convention (passing arguments via register).
> I am still using your library for the rest of the calls as
> they are all
> object methods (& cdecl) and there is no other way to call
> them than by
> reference, so big thanks to you for that...
Glad someone else has a use for it. :)
Matt Lewis
4. RE: Wrapping C -- errno's?
Matthew Lewis wrote:
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andy Serpa [mailto:ac at onehorseshy.com]
>
> >
> > Matthew Lewis wrote:
>
> > As far as callbacks, I solved it using the method described a few
> > messages ago (Re:Callback problem), but you might want to
> > take a look at
> > your func_asm in fptr.e -- seems to call the function ok but
> > not always
> > exit properly, but I'm not qualified to comment. (If I call
> > those same
> > functions that were crashing myself via call_cdecl_func they don't
> > crash, by the way, just when they are called from the .dll.)
>
> Do you know what compiler compiled the dll? As I recall, I only really
> tested using MSVC6. I wonder if the compiler is using some sort of
> fastcall
> convention (passing arguments via register).
>
Visual C++ 6.0 (big thanks to Evan Marshall for compiling it!)
I can send you the .dll and show you the calls that aren't working if
you like. Or just wait a few days until I release the wrapper and you
can just change the callbacks to your method and play around with it...
> > I am still using your library for the rest of the calls as
> > they are all
> > object methods (& cdecl) and there is no other way to call
> > them than by
> > reference, so big thanks to you for that...
>
> Glad someone else has a use for it. :)
>
It makes the otherwise impossible possible, so it is a great help for
using all those existing C libraries out there...
5. RE: Wrapping C -- errno's?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andy Serpa [mailto:ac at onehorseshy.com]
> Visual C++ 6.0 (big thanks to Evan Marshall for compiling it!)
>
> I can send you the .dll and show you the calls that aren't working if
> you like. Or just wait a few days until I release the
> wrapper and you
> can just change the callbacks to your method and play around
> with it...
Thanks, I'll just wait for the release. I'm going out of town in a few
days, so I'm pretty busy right now.
Matt Lewis
