Re: Source Tree Preference
Re: Source Tree Preference
- Subject: Re: Source Tree Preference
- From: Marshall Clow <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 07:45:35 -0800
At 10:10 AM -0500 11/10/03, Andy Satori wrote:
Let me provide a real world solution where this is a problem, and
how it's dealt with in another world.
Visual Studio.NET 2003 C++. Build and try to compile an application
that implements the IBandObject interface, using the Microsoft
Example code if you wish.
Click Compile. (it won't in the default configuration).
Do a Find In Files of the IBandObject Interface ID. You'll find it
buried deep in the hierarchy, in the correct file name, but the
wrong path.
The problem is that the search path pulls the file that i hits first
in the search path, the default installation puts the correct
ShellObj.h file about 4 down the list and therefore example code
doesn't work.
If this wasn't recursive, you wouldn't see the alternate header at
all. So instead of having a missing declaration altogether, you
have a mismatched version.
So what you are saying is that MS's example programs are broken.
No real surprise there.
I implemented a replacement for the Windows resource compiler (RC)
once, several years
ago, only to discover that 50% of their examples had serious syntax
errors in them that were
ignored by MS's compiler.
In the case of Windows, this exact situation is brought about by the
way they support multiple versions of the same API with #defines and
different directory structures.
And this is not true on Mac OS X?
What's is this, then?
dhcp9:/usr/include/gcc/darwin marshall$ ls -l
drwxr-xr-x 12 root wheel 408 4 Nov 08:51 2.95.2
drwxr-xr-x 12 root wheel 408 4 Nov 08:51 3.1
drwxr-xr-x 14 root wheel 476 4 Nov 08:51 3.3
lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 3 4 Nov 08:44 3.3-fast -> 3.3
lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 3 4 Nov 08:44 default -> 3.3
The XCode approach is, in my opinion, the right one. It also has
the added benefit of reducing the risk to the developer of
accidently including cross version dependancies in the platform
SDK's.
You are welcome to your opinion. However, does not match my experience.
By the way, spouting about how CodeWarrior does things isn't
necessarily a good thing. I spent many years working with Watcom's
C++ on OS/2 and Windows. I swear that both the CodeWarrior and
Watcom UI's are classic examples of how NOT to write an IDE.
Perpetuating that toture upon anyone in a modern development
environment is "Cruel and Unusual Punishment".
"I spent several years working with Watcom. CodeWarrior is bad."
I couldn't find any logical connection between these statements.
Since Apple is trying to woo CodeWarrior developers to XCode, your
attitude of "Your tools stink.
Using them is torture" is unlikely to be persuasive or useful.
I find in interesting that many of the responses that I have received
in this thread have:
1) Asserted that "CodeWarrior is bad"
2) Asserted that "Unix is good"
3) Told me that I am stupid.
and so on.
These are hardly convincing arguments.
--
-- Marshall
Marshall Clow Idio Software <mailto:email@hidden>
Hey! Who messed with my anti-paranoia shot?
_______________________________________________
xcode-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives: http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/xcode-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.