Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!overload!dillon
From: dillon@overload.Berkeley.CA.US (Matthew Dillon)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer
Subject: Re:  Any restrictions with making programs PURE?
Message-ID: <dillon.6937@overload.Berkeley.CA.US>
Date: 24 Apr 91 20:55:21 GMT
References: <1991Apr12.203658.11790@unlinfo.unl.edu> <MWM.91Apr23124114@raven.pa.dec.com>
Organization: Not an Organization
Lines: 30

In article <MWM.91Apr23124114@raven.pa.dec.com> mwm@pa.dec.com (Mike (My Watch Has Windows) Meyer) writes:
>In article <1991Apr19.231119.6428@disk.uucp> crazyrat@disk.uucp (@jap) writes:
>   In article <1991Apr12.203658.11790@unlinfo.unl.edu>, 231b3678@fergvax.unl.edu (Phil Dietz) writes:
>   > Are there any restrictions with making 'C' programs PURE?  Is it just a matter
>   > of linking it with cres.o?
>...
>   I don't normally do re-entrant routines in C, but in Assembler.  It's much
>   easier..
>
>This isn't. Linking with cres.o is enough to get the C compiler to
>dynamically allocate your statics. That takes care of that. If you
>need to refer to an absolute object (Custom comes to mind) you'll have
>to declare it far. I vaguelly recall some compilation modes that don't
>work with cres.o (-b0?), but don't have the details in handy.
>
>	<mike

    Well, not quite.. with SAS/C you also have to #include <proto/all.h>,
    but it still isn't much.  With DICE you don't have to do a blasted
    thing except give the compiler the -r option.  <poof>, residentable
    reentrantable executable.

					-Matt

--

    Matthew Dillon	    dillon@Overload.Berkeley.CA.US
    891 Regal Rd.	    uunet.uu.net!overload!dillon
    Berkeley, Ca. 94708
    USA