Re: [OT] e to the i pi

"Keith Thompson" <kst-u@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
"Malcolm McLean" <regniztar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
[...]
Anyway I have registered and agreed not to distribute any programs
compiled
with it as open source, etc, etc, etc. I've no real choice. A computer
isn't
a computer without a programming environment - it's just a glorified
typewriter.

Do they *really* require you to agree to that? How can they enforce a
restriction like that? If you distribute your own source code, how
can the fact that you've fed it to their compiler affect your rights?
I suspect the situation isn't that simple.

You can always install Cygwin, which includes gcc (I'm not sure how
much support it has for Windows-specific programming, though).

I think actually the open source restriction applies to anything based on
their samples.
Since the API is so intricate the only sensible way to to take a working
program and modify it, this could be very broad. They are obviously scared
of GNU.

I didn't read the agreement very carefully. I doubt the thing has any legal
force because you are logging into a computer, not signing a binding
contract.

The saga continues. I installed the free C compiler. It compiles "hello
world". But it won't do a Windows program. I didn't buy Vista for its
command shell capabilities, so I download the SDK. Fair enough. The compiler
won't recognise it. After about two hour rooting about on the web, I find a
Microsoft page telling me how to edit various configuration files to get it
to work - two of them, plus paths. Meanwhile the OS merrily throws threats
at every edit. Of course I make a typing mistake. At 1.00 in the morning, I
finally get a "Hello World" - in C++, I haven't figiured out how to get C
mode yet.

I am a programmer not a hacker. Some people might see this as an interesting
challenge. Personally I just see it as a total nuisance which takes times
from what I should be doing, like adding subroutines to BASICdraw. Two days
wasted. This sort of thing is often rationalised as "teething troubles". In
fact it is a constant situation. At work I am struggling with two new
programming environments - R and a new Lisp compiler. In computing, you are
very frequently using software for the first time.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: [EGN] Numerical Accuracy
    ... The advice worked because in fact the Microsoft compiler had a bug. ... The capabilities of the optimizer are not so ... The language standard itself says ... of "programming" as a nonprofession. ...
    (comp.programming)
  • Re: Brian Kernighan, maybe Im not worthy, maybe Im scum
    ... and just hone in on the stuff related to programming and this newsroup] ... moron that was taken from optimization which does hoist when to do so ... compiler design and optimization, including my 1976 text in graduate ... loop in a language in which the designers messed up, ...
    (comp.programming)
  • Re: e to the i pi
    ... a computer without a programming environment - it's just a glorified ... much support it has for Windows-specific programming, ... I think actually the open source restriction applies to anything based on ... I installed the free C compiler. ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: Javas performance far better that optimized C++
    ... The compiler is extremely stupid. ... no memory leaks are guaranteed. ... However I have GC in my .NET programming. ... "C.9.1 Automatic Garbage Collection ...
    (comp.lang.cpp)
  • Re: Multi Threading Options
    ... An idea I tried was to build in an object-based file system back around 1977. ... and had no interest at all in the underlying byte stream sent to a compiler. ... something seriously missing in modern programming environments. ... but in a truly modern programming environment these would ...
    (microsoft.public.vc.mfc)