home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!mcsun!uknet!ox-prg!oxuniv!econz
- From: econz@vax.oxford.ac.uk
- Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
- Subject: MS C/C++ 7 disappointments
- Message-ID: <1992Jul29.115500.7882@vax.oxford.ac.uk>
- Date: 29 Jul 92 10:55:00 GMT
- Organization: Oxford University VAXcluster
- Lines: 47
-
-
-
- I have a large Dos application which I developed using MSC 6. Having
- read the review in Microsoft Systems Journal I was quite excited
- to receive MS C/C++ 7. Unfortunately it turned out to be a disappointment.
- I am programming for Dos, using C only.
-
- - First of all, the marketing section forgot to point out that you cannot
- combine p-code and overlays in one program. Even Microsoft Technical
- Support was surprised about this. It seemed ideal: p-code part of the
- root, overlay the separate tasks. I would be happy if someone proved
- me wrong on this point.
- - The Exepack option (LINK) doesn't work with overlaid programs, they
- just hang at start-up.
- - Codeview keeps on hanging on overlaid programs (I'm using the new
- dynamic overlay system, called MOVE). It hangs when CV tries to load the
- executable, but sometimes works when changing which files have
- debugging on. Usually the program works normally,
- but on one occasion it hang on exit (which made my think there's
- something wrong with CVPACK).
- I installed 386max, and tried it under Windows 3.1 as well ("This program
- has violated system integrity due to an invalid general protection fault
- and will be terminated").
- This is the worst bit, I cannot write programs without a debugger, and
- the program takes too much memory without overlays.
- - I didn't manage to get the function level linking (/Gy) working.
- With function level linking, all functions end up in a COMDAT
- segment, instead of a file_TEXT segment. This should enable the
- linker to throw out unused functions, and gives the option to
- allocate individual functions to an overlay (this is what I tried).
- I gave up after a while, because after the previous problems I
- tended to blame Microsoft rather than myself.
- It brought up a question: Does anybody know how the linker resolves
- functions which have the same name (it doesn't seem to make a difference
- whether functions are static or not).
-
- My conclusion is that the compiler seems to be fine, but that the tools
- are pretty unstable. I hope that the Windows tools are better.
-
- To end on a positive note: I have a 32-bit version of the program using
- Watcom C 9.0/386. It took a little time to convert the assembler part of
- my program, but it's all working fine. No problems linking or debugging at all.
- My only wish is that they make the debugger interface more similar to Codeview.
-
- I'd be very interested to hear other people's experience.
-
- Jurgen Doornik
-