Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site hao.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!pyramid!ut-sally!seismo!hao!hull
From: hull@hao.UUCP (Howard Hull)
Newsgroups: net.micro.amiga
Subject: Re: AmigaTerm & Lattice_C
Message-ID: <1893@hao.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 26-Dec-85 22:58:51 EST
Article-I.D.: hao.1893
Posted: Thu Dec 26 22:58:51 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 28-Dec-85 01:40:41 EST
References: <1889@hao.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: High Altitude Obs./NCAR, Boulder CO
Lines: 56

Gee, I got this very nice letter from Courtney Prodehl at caip via CSNET (to
which I have no hope of replying) saying

>You seem to have an inordinate amount of difficulty compiling with Lattice C.
>For starters, it sounds like you failed to read through the install-c batch
>file on the C disk.  It mentions toward the end that Lattice C REQUIRES the
>logical name assignments mentioned be included in your startup-sequence.

Well, it didn't seem like an unusual amount of trouble to me; the compilers
always seem to require weirdo syntax library flags (even 4.2BSD :-) does)
So I took another look at my install-C file to find out what I didn't read.
Amazing results; the following is the ENTIRE contents of my C1.0:s/install-C
file:

	; This script will install the entire contents of the C directory on
	; this disk into the C: directory.
	;
	copy C1.0:c C: all

Courtney goes on to say

>Then,
>the batch files provided, namely lca and linka, can be used which are a lot
>easier than remembering where the include files are located, and the strange
>syntax of the linker.
>
>Also, if you use the compiler driver, LC, rather than LC1 and LC2 (the batch
>file lca does this), your quad file will get written to ram disk, this is
>MUCH faster than running each phase of the compiler separately.

so I tried to run ED on my C1.0:c/LC file, and ED snapped right back

	File contains binary

and dumped me.

I was not able to find the files lca and linka at all.  There are a coulple of
long ASCII files in the C1.0:examples directory that contain information that
is duplicated in the update documentation.  But I had already determined that
the printed documentation was hopelessly out of phase with what was in the 11-
page update addendum sheets.  As a for instance, the main documentation calls
out the command line
	LINK FROM C.0,XYZ.O,QRS.O TO CPROG LIBRARY LC.LIB,AMIGA.LIB
which, while close, is still is a no cigar transaction on account of no C.0
file on my disk.  Am I missing something? are there files on these disks
that cannot be found with "dir C1.0: OPT A"?  Also, how do you find the file
dates and the file sizes?  (I had a real tussle with the Amiga "Back to the
Future" social disease after several of my files got contaminated from the
also brand new Assm1.0 disk...) Does anyone know what's going on here?  Did
my Amiga Dealer sell me a "Hongkong Copy" of C1.0?  Doesn't seem like it, as
it came with the developer's manual and was nicely wrapped in plastic, and it
cost A LOT of money, too!
						Best Regards,	Howard Hull
[If yet unproven concepts are outlawed in the range of discussion...
                   ...Then only the deranged will discuss yet unproven concepts]
        {ucbvax!hplabs | allegra!nbires | harpo!seismo } !hao!hull