Author: Mike Curtis
Date: 12:11:31 07/07/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 07, 2000 at 04:25:53, Georg v. Zimmermann wrote: >On July 06, 2000 at 22:31:57, Mike Curtis wrote: > >>On July 06, 2000 at 17:52:29, Tom King wrote: >> >>>On July 06, 2000 at 15:10:21, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >>> >>>>On July 06, 2000 at 14:37:11, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>> >>>>>On July 06, 2000 at 13:31:37, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >>>>>>On July 06, 2000 at 07:10:08, Inmann Werner wrote: >>>>>>>On July 05, 2000 at 22:57:48, Larry Griffiths wrote: >>>>>>>>Hi, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I assume most everyone is using a mixture of C, C++ and assembler for their >>>>>>>>chess programs. I am having one heck of a time with getting variables aligned >>>>>>>>in the Borland C++ Builder compiler. I tell it to align on quadwords, but the >>>>>>>>.asm output shows doubleword alignment in segments and align statements before >>>>>>>>variables. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>My question is: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>What compilers are y'all using for Windows chess programs? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Larry :) >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I use the Watcom Compiler, and like it much:-) >>>>>>>Unfortunatly, Watcom has run out of fonds, and there will be no update, so I >>>>>>>will have to change to the MS Compiler (I own it too) and I hate it!!!!!! >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Werner >>>>>> >>>>>>Why do you hate VC? >>>>> >>>>>Usually, it's just comfort zone. I used Borland for a while, and hated VC. >>>>>Then I got used to VC and hated Borland. A couple cycles of that went on, and >>>>>then I liked them both. >>>>> >>>>>Once you get used to a certain interface and way of doing things, it is annoying >>>>>to have to endure the learning curve again for a new tool. >>>> >>>>Hmmm. A compiler's interface might require me to stand on my head during each >>>>build, but I would still like it if it produced better code. >>>> >>>>-Tom >>> >>>Now, you don't mean that do you? >>> >>>In the real world, good code = correct code. Nothing else matters. >>> >>>In the computer chess world, we all seem to strive for code which executes as >>>quick as possible, even if it isn't always correct. >>> >>>One thing that gets me about VC is the way MS push you towards using their IDE/ >>>environment. Grr. I like to choose my own editor, y'know. >>> >>>Another thing is the bugs that have traditionally haunted the VC family of >>>compilers, and the fact that patches to cure these bugs are *big*. >>> >> >>Sometimes the Microsoft compiler is grossly unsatisfactory: >> >>Microsoft (R) 32-bit C/C++ Optimizing Compiler Version 11.00.7022 for 80x86 >> >>chessprogram.c(123) : fatal error C1001: INTERNAL COMPILER ERROR >> >>... >> (compiler file 'E:\utc\src\\P2\main.c', line 379) >>... >> (compiler file 'E:\utc\src\\P2\reader.c', line 1651) >>... >> (compiler file 'msc1.cpp', line 1188) >>... >> (compiler file 'E:\utc\src\\P2\p2symtab.c', line 2387) >>... >> >> Please choose the Technical Support command on the Visual C++ >> Help menu, or open the Technical Support help file for more information >> >> >>FathomEngine >>-Mike > >I hate the MSVC Error messages too. It is not understandable why "Turbo/Borland >Pascal for dos" a few years ago produced excellent error messages pointing to >the correct line in your code where something went wrong while MSVC produces >garbage you have to learn to read. >For example I know now that "Local function definition" error means you forgot >to close a block} somewhere (yes its obvious once you figured what it means) but >there are tons of error messages like that where you first have to learn the >Microsoft-Error-Message-Language. > >Georg :) Since this reply pertains to arguably ambiguous compiler messages for simple developer syntax errors, I should clarify that the preceding error messages refer to the source code of the compiler _itself_. FathomEngine -Mike
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.