Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer
Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!daemon
From: tom@mims-iris.waterloo.edu (Tom Haapanen)
Subject: Re: Open letter to Microsoft re: SDK and C6.0 (long)
Message-ID: <1990Nov28.125836.10515@watserv1.waterloo.edu>
Sender: daemon@watserv1.waterloo.edu
Organization: University of Waterloo, WATMIMS Research Group
References: <5880@crash.cts.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 90 12:58:36 GMT
Lines: 28

Alen Shapiro <alen@crash.cts.com> writes:
> 1) nmake uses up global heap....

...or use one of the commercial makes, such as MKS or Opus.

> 4) fprintf(stde{err,out}) is not supported under windows 3.0. Why
>    did microsoft not provide a standard text window into which these
>    messages could be thrown.

Take a look at tty/wstdio.c in the sample sources --- there is source
right there!  There are good reasons for not including standard i/o in
Windows --- and Windows apps shouldn't be doing that kind of thing anyway!
	
> 5) Why do I need 2 compilers 1 for development and the other for
>    production? Why is the standard comiler so slow (an hour to
>    compile on the PS2/80, (15 minutes on the macII and 5 minutes
>    on SPARC))? Why does the development compiler (-qc) not work
>    in so many cases?

An hour?!?  Our 25,000-line application takes 16 minutes to compile, link
and rc on a 386/25 (with a 1 MB SmartDrive) with MSC 5.1 and default
optimization.  Are you using a disk cache?  Is that a 16 MHz PS/2-80?  Or
is your application really immense?

We don't use -qc --- why bother when even -Ox is fast enough?

[ \tom haapanen --- university of waterloo --- tom@mims-iris.waterloo.edu ]
[ "i don't even know what street canada is on"               -- al capone ]