Xref: utzoo comp.sources.d:4071 comp.sys.ibm.pc:34958 Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!bobmon From: bobmon@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (RAMontante) Newsgroups: comp.sources.d,comp.sys.ibm.pc Subject: Re: Problems compiling Gnuplot w/ TC 2.0 Keywords: linking, error, Gnuplot, TC 2.0 Message-ID: <26299@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> Date: 19 Sep 89 23:28:14 GMT Reply-To: bobmon@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (RAMontante) Distribution: usa Organization: malkaryotic Lines: 33 excerpted from me: ->What's happening is that TC2.0 (unlike previous versions) no longer ->accepts lines that are delimited by ^J only --- it demands ^M^J. By [...] ->TC2.0 also made one executable grow by 25% over TC1.5. I think Borland ->has convinced me not to "upgrade" to inferior successor packages. excerpted from baumann@muon.UUCP (Michael Baumann) <497@proton.UUCP> : -1) How TC2.0 handles ^J or ^J^M verses TC1.5 should be a moot point. - No where in the definition of the C language are new-lines (however - you want to make 'em) defined as required for ANY statement. They are - WHITE SPACE. To be consumed by the Lexical Analyzer. They should - Never be seen by the parser. - -2) When you made your comparison of TC2.0 vs TC1.5 were ALL options - the same? Including supression of debugger support? Since you asked, instead of assuming... yes, I turned everything off to get things as small as possible. Still the executable grows. Also, as others have pointed out, it is actually the preprocessor that wants the carriage returns. Someone else tells me that Borland are addressing the issue, in response to numerous complaints from people trying to port code from one system to another. I don't keep 2 operating systems on my 8088 box, I just split my activity between home and a VAX at school. My fingers are crossed. -- Bob Montante (bobmon@cs.indiana.edu) | "Oh dear, I think you'll find Computer Science Dept, Lindley Hall 101 | reality's on the blink again." Indiana University | -- Marvin Bloomington, IN 47401 | The Paranoid Android