Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!becker!hybrid!scifi!bywater!uunet!bria!mike
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Splitting Turbo C library modules
Keywords: TurboC, libraries, modules
Message-ID: <350@bria>
Date: 14 Jan 91 03:54:09 GMT
References: <1991Jan12.222446.26899@odin.diku.dk>
Reply-To: mike@bria.UUCP (Michael Stefanik)
Distribution: comp
Organization: Briareus Corporation, Los Angeles, CA
Lines: 25

In article <1991Jan12.222446.26899@odin.diku.dk> diku.dk!fedtmule (Jens Markussen) writes:
>	I'm looking for a way to add my functions, with the functions acting
>as separate modules (same style that Borlands uses in their libraries 
>(cs.lib..)), but without having to split my sources-file into lots of small
>files. Any clues as to how this could be done, would be appreciated....

I'm not big on DOS C compilers, but the philsophy should be same ... different
functions should be kept in different sources; this is good taste and makes
life a whole lot easier.  For example, let's say you send me a copy of the
source (in one huge file), and I want to change something.  Is it reasonable
for you to require that I recompile *everything* when all that was done was
changing one line of code in one function?  As far as coordinating what gets
compiled and what doesn't, this is what 'make' is for.

The whole strength of C is portability and modularity; by keeping everything
all lumped together, you're defeating the elegance and power of the language
and the tools used with it.

Sorry to get religious on you ... :-)
-- 
Michael Stefanik, Systems Engineer (JOAT), Briareus Corporation
UUCP: ...!uunet!bria!mike
--
technoignorami (tek'no-ig'no-ram`i) a group of individuals that are constantly
found to be saying things like "Well, it works on my DOS machine ..."