CompuServe Archive

This is an archive of CompuServe forum messages from 1985 to 1995, as saved in transcripts by John Foust.

Search Results (90 messages)

#8381- Quotes in replies Message #8501
From: Burt Johnson Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C August 11, 1993 2:50 PM
>> If you're not sure what someone's talking about, you can always read the earlier posting… it's online, I use the 'ri' command. Not when the scan is being done offline using Nav. I sometimes get off-the-wall comments to me that, out of context are meaningless. A one liner quoted…
#8347- Size_t existence Message #8486
From: Joe Sewell Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C August 11, 1993 1:53 PM
–> There's no need to quote… what do you think this is, Internet? 🙂
#8381- Quotes in replies Message #8417
From: Steve Stockman Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C August 10, 1993 2:49 AM
John: >>> I use the 'ri' command. This is NOT Internet. People pay for their time.
#8381- #Quotes in replies Message #8384
From: James W. Walker Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C August 9, 1993 10:24 AM
Sure, this is not UseNet, and people pay for their time. People who want to pay as little as possible use Navigator. But that means they cannot easily read the predecessors of a message, if they were read in a previous Nav session.
#Quotes in replies Message #8357
From: Steve Stockman Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C August 8, 1993 11:56 PM
John: >>> There's no need to quote… what do you think this is, Internet? 🙂
#8311- Size_t existence Message #8338
From: Joe Sewell Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C August 8, 1993 4:06 PM
–> Pragmas may be "ANSI compliant", but they're certainly implementation dependent.
Size_t existence Message #7998
From: Joe Sewell Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 31, 1993 3:32 PM
–> Presto, by depending on 'pragma once', Think C isn't ANSI.
#7695- Size_t existence Message #7782
From: Joe Sewell Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 28, 1993 3:37 PM
John, I think part of your message got chopped off. It ends with, "But if someone needs to include 'stdio.h'," … and stops there. –> And the answer is (was?) that it decides to run the game "Rogue", no matter what the pragma was. Pragmas, by definition, are not portable.…
#7605- Size_t existence Message #7680
From: Phil Shapiro Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 27, 1993 7:04 AM
"Every other compiler I've seen, that wants to insure that an include file is only included once, uses a simple system of #ifndef / #define / #endif instead of resorting to an entirely non-portable pragma." Saying that one is simpler than the other is a matter of taste. From the…
#7466 Size_t existence Message #7580
From: Joe Sewell Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 25, 1993 10:19 PM
–> Why does Think C use this custom pragma to do the job, when a more useful alternative exists?
From: Joe Sewell Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 25, 1993 10:19 PM
John, Part of the problem here is THINK C does things slightly differently. A "Build Application" will take care of all of what a makefile would do, including verifying changed files (without actually checking the file dates, of course, unless you tell it to, either directly or indirectly by turning…
#7466 #Size_t existence Message #7553
From: Robert S. Mah[OSB] Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 25, 1993 11:30 AM
I agree with John. The #pragma once directive always struck me as superfluous. The #ifndef/#define/#endif trio _is_ a de-facto standard among most C programmers. BTW, I have also been hit by the size_t problem and just added the trio myself, but having it included would have been nice. Cheers, Rob
#7434 #Size_t existence Message #7466
From: Syndesis Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 23, 1993 12:24 PM
I understand there's no "portable", standardized way to do this. It just "happens" that Microsoft, Borland, Manx, several Unix compilers, the Metaware compiler, etc. "happened" to use this #define method. Why does Think C use this custom pragma to do the job, when a more useful alternative exists?
From: Bob Foster Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 23, 1993 12:24 PM
"I've heard that future E.T.O discs will include Symantec Think C 6.0 instead of the MPW system." Not instead of, in addition to. Bob
#7349- Size_t existence Message #7434
From: Phil Shapiro Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 23, 1993 7:42 AM
"Is there some way I can portably check if size_t is around, short of re-editing your standard #include files to act like the other compilers?" By definition, there no "portable" way to check if size_t has been defined. Instead, you should just #include the header file that defines size_t, which…
From: Syndesis Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 22, 1993 12:14 AM
I've heard that future E.T.O discs will include Symantec Think C 6.0 instead of the MPW system. I've embarked on a Mac development project, but it stalled when I couldn't find an automatic way to build a series of applications. On Unix and DOS environments, I can write a script…
From: colin birch Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 21, 1993 11:23 PM
I received the Error "Internal error (ZREF)" while trying to compile this simple program using THINK C 6.0 on my Macintosh Centris 610. And according to the User Manual it states to Report this error to you. I am running under System 7.1, with several INIT's loaded, but have never…
#7330 Oracle & THINK 6 Message #7340
From: Burt Johnson Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 21, 1993 9:23 PM
I'm emailing you a project file from a project that works with Oracle. No sources, but you can look at the options I used to see what worked for me. – Burt
#7305 porting file i/o Message #7335
From: Rick Martin Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 21, 1993 7:20 PM
I'm back. I solved my own problem, by determining that I had "infer prototypes" set, and there were no actual prototypes for my file i/o functions. As soon as I added unix.h to my code, all was well. Prehaps, this can help someone else. Have fun, Rick
#7273 #Oracle & THINK 6 Message #7330
From: Ken Laws Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 21, 1993 6:07 PM
Burt… Yes, I have the docs and have installed Oracle. In fact, I have both HyperCard and MacApp-written apps using Oracle, but they were written with MPW. What I was hoping to find was some compiler option in Think that needed to be set a certain way, etc. I probably…
#7190 Think C 5.0 -> 6.0? Message #7320
From: Joe Sewell Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 21, 1993 5:12 PM
Matthew, It's quite possible that you got replies (I'm fairly sure I replied to you, for example), but you didn't come back into the forum before the replies scrolled off. Don't forget, too, that you might want to fetch this entire thread, not just look at messages waiting for you.…
From: Joe Sewell Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 21, 1993 5:12 PM
Sounds neat, Joe. Not quite as good as having segments unloaded automatically (when specified), but significantly better than what we have now. Thanks!!! (How's that for commentary payment? 🙂 ) Another Joe
#7294 4 byte int problem Message #7318
From: Joe Sewell Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 21, 1993 5:12 PM
I'm with you, Michael. Where I used to work, we even went as far as to define types that indicated the size, and used THEM, not the underlying C-provided types. (We were dealing with code that had to be as portable as possible to VAX/VMS, MeSs-Windows, and the IBM Mainframe.)…
#7237 List in Dialog Message #7312
From: Darren Williams Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 21, 1993 4:38 PM
Thanks, Spec I'll have a look at AppMaker. Darren
#7195 List in Dialog Message #7311
From: Darren Williams Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 21, 1993 4:37 PM
Thanks, Steve, That seemed to solve the problem. Darren
From: Jim Kingsepp Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 21, 1993 3:54 PM
I've been having problems using the standard C calls to malloc() and realloc() in my C code for the Mac. When I call either of these functions I get 15024 bytes of memory allocated for my pointer. However, when I call free() to deallocate the memory (in the case of…
#porting file i/o Message #7305
From: Rick Martin Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 21, 1993 3:26 PM
Hello All, I am porting some C code to the Mac and running into problems with using the unix compatible file i/o functions (open, write, read, lseek). The operations appear to function (i.e., errno = 0, and proper return codes), but the function doesn't seem to have done its job.…
XSYM Foramt Message #7299
From: Brooks Bell Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 21, 1993 2:04 PM
I'm a tool developer very interested in using SYM file based debuggers with THINK C stand alone code resources. Can anyone provide information regarding the XSYM format so that I can right a filter to convert it into straight SYM? I'm also very interested in the protocols involved in creating…
From: Brooks Bell Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 21, 1993 2:00 PM
Hello Bernie: I'm interested in the Macintosh positions you are putting together. I have been working as a contract programmer for two years now and before that worked for several software companies. My most recent project was the working on the Japanese version of Symantec's GreatWorks – I converted the…
#7166 #4 byte int problem Message #7294
From: Michael Brennan Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 21, 1993 1:16 PM
Re: "Yea, I saw your message about the MemCheck library. One problem with 4 byte ints is that everyone has to agree to do it." I see so many people remarking or complaining about problems with 2 byte versus 4 byte ints. (Back before Think offered a 4 byte int,…
How much is the upgrade price from ThinkC 5 to ThinkC 6? I got v5 around March
The News Flash mentions Symantec C++ for MPW – first I've heard of it. Does this mean MPW's _not_ going away? Think C is nice for small projects but it's completely inadequate for what I need.
#7145 Running 2 TPMs Message #7277
Phil, Speaking about future releases, I'd like to see an "enhancement" to TPM. How about adding better window management under the "Windows" menu? Like tiling side-by-side, top-and-bottom, etc. Multiple files are almost always open, and it's a pain to rearrange them by hand all the time. Also, any progress in…
#7172 #Oracle & THINK 6 Message #7273
From: Burt Johnson Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 21, 1993 1:33 AM
>> Are there newer Oracle library files somewhere? Yes, available from Oracle. Mine have a modify date of 4/8/92. Do you have the documentation that came with the libs? The documentation pretty much describes how to go about doing it. I have a reasonably large application that is currently being…
#7172 Oracle & THINK 6 Message #7266
From: Robert Darko Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 20, 1993 11:22 PM
I can't remember very well, but you might want to contact Oracle and discuss this with them. However, if memory serves me well, we had a version of the C code/libraries that were orignally set up for Oracle 5.x then they released 6.x. Well, they changed the internal structures for…
#7192 TC++ in 5Mb? Message #7264
From: jud spencer Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 20, 1993 10:47 PM
Andy, I am currently doing half of my development work on a Centris 610 8/230. I am working on two projects, one using C + objects and the other C++. I have not had too many problems, though I can't wait for my next royalty check to get another 8…
What do I need? Message #7258
From: Verne Arase [LUC] Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 20, 1993 10:33 PM
>Can Think C produce stand-alone applications, system extensions and >control panels, or is any additional software required. Think C can do it all … and even includes a built-in assembler. >Also, what verison of C is it based on – Kernighan/Ritchie or ANSI? Think's C product has evolved from the…
From: Verne Arase [LUC] Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 20, 1993 10:33 PM
>Let me start by saying I'm not a bithead nor am I an assembler >programmer. Are you sure you're in the right place? The Think languages run on Macs, whereas your code is using PC bios calls.
#7179 #List in Dialog Message #7237
From: Spec Bowers Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 20, 1993 7:00 PM
Darren, Even if the instructions in THINK Reference were correct, it's only half the solution. You need a user draw procedure (the easy part). You also need a dialog filter proc (ther harder part). (The following is a commercial announcement…) The fastest and easiest way to implement a list in…
#7192 TC++ in 5Mb? Message #7226
From: Kevin Irlen Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 20, 1993 4:21 PM
If you stick with C, 5 Mb should be approximately as OK for fair-sized TCL apps as it was in TC5, but it'll probably be tight if you do it in C++. Kevin Irlen Symantec Languages Support
#7121 TPM complaint Message #7202
From: Kevin Irlen Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 20, 1993 9:38 AM
> Well, the segmentation mechanism was hardly intended to serve as a means of organizing documentation, but I'll pass on your suggestion that the TPM check to see whether there's at least one file in a "segment" with translator assigned to it. Kevin Irlen Symantec Languages Support
#7179 #List in Dialog Message #7195
From: Steve Stockman Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 20, 1993 4:01 AM
Darren: I think the example in Think Ref is bad. In main(), item 3 is set to be a userItem with draw procedure UserProc. In UserProc(), the list is built and drawn into the rectangle properly, and then item 3 is set to be a userItem with draw procedure theList…
#TC++ in 5Mb? Message #7192
From: Andy Dent Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 20, 1993 2:11 AM
Hi Am I paranoid, ill-informed or … I'm unwilling to upgrade from Think C 5 because of the number of bug reports (OK, I know most of them are C++) but mostly because the suggestions I've heard indicate I will no longer be able to develop on my 8Mb machine…
From: Matthew Kaufman Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 20, 1993 2:05 AM
I've left this same message once before… I'm wondering if anyone ever received it? I've been using Think C 5.0 for some time, but with many problems. First, I get ZREF Errors all of the time. As a result, I have to remove all of the object from my project…
#7146 Running 2 TPMs Message #7183
From: Burt Johnson Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 19, 1993 11:29 PM
>> if there are specific CMaster capabilities that you'd like to see in BBEdit, drop a note and tell me How about bulk comment/uncomment function? – Burt
#List in Dialog Message #7179
From: Darren Williams Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 19, 1993 10:35 PM
To Technical support I am having difficulty creating a list box in a modal dialog box using THINK C. According to the THINK reference example a call is made to SetDItem with a handle to a user procedure. From this user procedure a call is made to setup the list…
#7152 Running 2 TPMs Message #7177
From: Rich Siegel Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 19, 1993 8:50 PM
>>>> I think the three things I use most in CMaster are comment/uncomment selection, prototype building, and multiple clipboards. The first two no doubt no doubt could be done with BBEdit extensions if they havn't already. (Prefix Lines works for commenting, but takes a few more steps than I'd like.…
#7128 THIN C vs.THINK C Message #7174
Steve, Thanks, #include solved the problem. Interesting lesson. As I mentioned, I'm new to this stuff and am plowing through. Thanks for taking the time to respond…and I'm about 100% sure there will be more questions! Mike
#Oracle & THINK 6 Message #7172
From: Ken Laws Symantec Dev Tools Forum · Think C July 19, 1993 6:54 PM
Hello! I'm pretty new to the THINK world. Up until now, I've been using MPW for all my programming. I've been working on a Mac application that uses Oracle version 6 (Oracle for the Mac 2.0). I'm supposed to convert it from MPW to THINK. When I try to run…
Hi y'all, The following code is used to manage code segment traffic in a large THINK C with objects application. We use the TCL and the Prepare() class libraries. I would like anyone's comments on this code. Anything appreciated. Your payment in full is the code itself. Please maintain the…

Page 1 of 2