1. binding IDE11.0
I have a problem trying to make ide.exe:
bindw ide.exw
gives:
Couldn't open include file: IDE_defaults.ew
however this file is present.
If I still try to run ide.exe I get:
BiG has not been declared
I have no problem running IDE unbound.
2. Re: binding IDE11.0
void writes:
> I have a problem trying to make ide.exe:
> bindw ide.exw
> gives:
> Couldn't open include file: IDE_defaults.ew
> however this file is present.
>
> If I still try to run ide.exe I get:
> BiG has not been declared
>
> I have no problem running IDE unbound.
I just tried it with 2.3 beta (to be released in a couple of days),
and it works fine.
I'm not sure what the problem is,
but keep in mind that:
- the alpha binder doesn't know about the new
EUINC environment variable, but the interpreter, exw.exe, does.
- the alpha binder may generate a bogus .exe anyway,
even when errors occur during the bind
Regards,
Rob Craig
Rapid Deployment Software
http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
3. Re: binding IDE11.0
Still unable to create IDE.EXE, I've got no problems with binding my own
progs. I reinstalled everything (including 2.3beta), I'd even tried to move
all the files to the same dir and set a path to it, but still this error:
Couldn't open include file: IDE_defaults.ew
Where does bindw tries to locate the include files? I've even tried moving
all files to C:\EUPHORIA\BIN\, no succes.
Also tried EUINC but bindw of 2.3beta also doesn't recognise it: Couldn't
open include file: win32lib.ew
This is easily solved by moving the win32lib to the working dir, but doesn't
seem to function for the IDE include file(s), strange.
I'm running WindowsXP and this is in my AUTOEXEC.BAT:
SET EUDIR=C:\EUPHORIA
SET PATH=%PATH%;C:\EUPHORIA\BIN
EUINC=C:\EUPHORIA\WIN32LIB
> > I have a problem trying to make ide.exe:
> > bindw ide.exw
> > gives:
> > Couldn't open include file: IDE_defaults.ew
> > however this file is present.
> >
> > If I still try to run ide.exe I get:
> > BiG has not been declared
> >
> > I have no problem running IDE unbound.
>
> I just tried it with 2.3 beta (to be released in a couple of days),
> and it works fine.
>
> I'm not sure what the problem is,
> but keep in mind that:
> - the alpha binder doesn't know about the new
> EUINC environment variable, but the interpreter, exw.exe, does.
> - the alpha binder may generate a bogus .exe anyway,
> even when errors occur during the bind
>
> Regards,
> Rob Craig
4. Re: binding IDE11.0
void writes:
> I'm running WindowsXP and this is in my AUTOEXEC.BAT:
> SET EUDIR=C:\EUPHORIA
> SET PATH=%PATH%;C:\EUPHORIA\BIN
> EUINC=C:\EUPHORIA\WIN32LIB
You need:
SET EUINC=...
just like the other two.
There was a mistake in the 2.3 alpha docs about this.
(pointed out by Igor Kachan).
As for IDE_defaults.ew, I don't know what the problem might be.
It works fine for me. Are IDE_defaults.ew and ide.exw in the same
directory? And are you typing:
bindw ide.exw
while you are in that directory? i.e. it's the current directory?
bindw should look first in the same directory as ide.exw,
then it should examine your EUINC, then it should look in
euphoria\include.
Check the include statement itself.
There might be a problem if there's a '\r' or some other
invisible character on the line along with IDE_defaults.ew
Maybe you should re-type that line.
Regards,
Rob Craig
Rapid Deployment Software
http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
5. Re: binding IDE11.0
I just discovered bindw doesn't recognise long filenames on my system, I can
bind it by renaming all include files to the 8.3 format. What can be the
problem? I'm running WindowsXP cmd.exe to open a DOS box, type: bindw
ide.exw
I also tried running a command.com DOS box because it doesn't support long
filenames, but same problem.
> As for IDE_defaults.ew, I don't know what the problem might be.
> It works fine for me. Are IDE_defaults.ew and ide.exw in the same
> directory? And are you typing:
> bindw ide.exw
> while you are in that directory? i.e. it's the current directory?
>
> bindw should look first in the same directory as ide.exw,
> then it should examine your EUINC, then it should look in
> euphoria\include.
>
> Check the include statement itself.
> There might be a problem if there's a '\r' or some other
> invisible character on the line along with IDE_defaults.ew
> Maybe you should re-type that line.
>
> Regards,
> Rob Craig
> Rapid Deployment Software
> http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
>
>
>
>
6. Re: binding IDE11.0
void writes:
> I just discovered bindw doesn't recognise long filenames on my system, I can
> bind it by renaming all include files to the 8.3 format. What can be the
> problem? I'm running WindowsXP cmd.exe to open a DOS box, type:
> bindw ide.exw
Edit your copy of bindw.bat.
Replace the line that says:
ex.exe bind.ex -w32 %1 %2 %3 %4 %5 %6 %7 %8 %9
with:
exw.exe bind.ex -w32 %1 %2 %3 %4 %5 %6 %7 %8 %9
The binder can run with either ex or exw (or exu).
It looks like XP doesn't have the DOS extension that supports
long filenames on Win95,98,ME, so ex will give you problems.
You might want to make the same change in bind.bat.
I'll change bindw.bat and bind.bat in the official version.
I was thinking of doing it anyway.
A separate console window will now appear while the binder is running.
Regards,
Rob Craig
Rapid Deployment Software
http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
7. Re: binding IDE11.0
Thanks Rob, that solved the problem.
> void writes:
> > I just discovered bindw doesn't recognise long filenames on my system, I
can
> > bind it by renaming all include files to the 8.3 format. What can be the
> > problem? I'm running WindowsXP cmd.exe to open a DOS box, type:
> > bindw ide.exw
>
> Edit your copy of bindw.bat.
> Replace the line that says:
> ex.exe bind.ex -w32 %1 %2 %3 %4 %5 %6 %7 %8 %9
> with:
> exw.exe bind.ex -w32 %1 %2 %3 %4 %5 %6 %7 %8 %9
>
> The binder can run with either ex or exw (or exu).
> It looks like XP doesn't have the DOS extension that supports
> long filenames on Win95,98,ME, so ex will give you problems.
> You might want to make the same change in bind.bat.
> I'll change bindw.bat and bind.bat in the official version.
> I was thinking of doing it anyway.
> A separate console window will now appear while the binder is running.
>
> Regards,
> Rob Craig
> Rapid Deployment Software
> http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
>
>
>
>
8. Re: binding IDE11.0
I have simplified this as far as I can
(was a fair few lines twixt silly constant mishap & for loop:)
constant integer=100
for i=1 to 3 do
end for
gave:
for has not been declared
for i=1 to 3 do
^
Rob, I think that is particularly unhelpful.
-- however I accept this may be low down on your list --
Pete
9. Re: binding IDE11.0
Pete writes:
> constant integer=100
> for i=1 to 3 do
> end for
Is this the exact code you ran?
It works fine for me. No error with the 2.3 beta interpreter.
2.3 alpha complains that you are trying to redefine "integer",
which was illegal until 2.3 beta came out.
Regards,
Rob Craig
Rapid Deployment Software
http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
10. Re: binding IDE11.0
- Posted by rossboyd at ihug.com.au
Jan 19, 2002
Thanks for this tip Rob.
It fixes the behaviour of ex.exe forcing a temporary fullscreen during
the bind process.
That makes me happy.
Thanks,
Ross
>
> void writes:
> > I just discovered bindw doesn't recognise long filenames on my
system, I can
> > bind it by renaming all include files to the 8.3 format. What can be
the
> > problem? I'm running WindowsXP cmd.exe to open a DOS box, type:
> > bindw ide.exw
>
> Edit your copy of bindw.bat.
> Replace the line that says:
> ex.exe bind.ex -w32 %1 %2 %3 %4 %5 %6 %7 %8 %9
> with:
> exw.exe bind.ex -w32 %1 %2 %3 %4 %5 %6 %7 %8 %9
>
> The binder can run with either ex or exw (or exu).
> It looks like XP doesn't have the DOS extension that supports
> long filenames on Win95,98,ME, so ex will give you problems.
> You might want to make the same change in bind.bat.
> I'll change bindw.bat and bind.bat in the official version.
> I was thinking of doing it anyway.
> A separate console window will now appear while the binder is running.
>
> Regards,
> Rob Craig
> Rapid Deployment Software
> http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
>
>
>
>
11. Re: binding IDE11.0
Rob, that "for" has not been declared - sorry, you clearly already
fixed that.
In the new scope rules:
"You can attach a namespace identifier to any user-defined variable,
constant, procedure or function"
I would add the qualifier "defined in the include file" at the end of
that sentence to remove any possible confusion. Without it I just had
a bit of a "eh, how?" moment, thinking local/private. [I think you'll
agree after defining local j referencing global:j is a non-starter]
Cheers, Pete
