Author Topic: C Combatability  (Read 6361 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Emil_halim

  • Guest
Re: C Combatability
« Reply #15 on: April 27, 2013, 07:54:37 AM »
Hi Charles,

if you please , take that into your considerations.

i am waiting becouse i tried to compile Zlib written  in c with Oxygen , so the first problem was acting of
#define.

thanks again for your oxygen effort.   

Charles Pegge

  • Guest
Re: C Combatability
« Reply #16 on: April 27, 2013, 08:09:08 AM »
Slowly getting there. I have a clearer picture now about what needs to be done for C preprocessor compatibility.

Though we will still have to deal with potential name/symbol conflicts.

Emil_halim

  • Guest
Re: C Combatability
« Reply #17 on: August 15, 2013, 01:39:22 PM »
Quote
I have a clearer picture now about what needs to be done for C preprocessor compatibility.

when can this Picture born and come to the life?

i think you forgot this topic.

BTW , why your country force United Nations to take action against us,we are fitting a terrorism her.
« Last Edit: August 15, 2013, 01:47:59 PM by Emil_halim »

JRS

  • Guest
Re: C Combatability
« Reply #18 on: August 15, 2013, 07:42:24 PM »
Maybe terrorists are smarting up and realize antagonizing countries with unlimited resources is counter productive so they are adopting the big fish in a small pond strategy. I'm hoping with time the fad wears off and people will find other ways to work out their differences. (paint balls, chess, ...)




Aurel

  • Guest
Re: C Combatability
« Reply #19 on: August 15, 2013, 09:29:14 PM »
Quote
BTW , why your country force United Nations to take action against us,we are fitting a terrorism her.
This is programming forum and really i don't see reason for such a political questions,right?

Emil_halim

  • Guest
Re: C Combatability
« Reply #20 on: August 15, 2013, 10:30:42 PM »
Maybe terrorists are smarting up and realize antagonizing countries with unlimited resources is counter productive so they are adopting the big fish in a small pond strategy. I'm hoping with time the fad wears off and people will find other ways to work out their differences. (paint balls, chess, ...)

John,

the Fact here is that the matter is not a differences between people, it is a real terrorism came from small amount of Armed group against unarmed people and State enterprises. i think your government did not seeing that well.

Note well , The police and the army deal gently with them and they are dealing terrorizing citizens

JRS

  • Guest
Re: C Combatability
« Reply #21 on: August 15, 2013, 10:35:31 PM »
In our country they are known as the mob, family, ...

Charles Pegge

  • Guest
Re: C Combatability
« Reply #22 on: August 16, 2013, 12:53:44 PM »

Hi Emil,

the C preprocessor is on my list. I have not forgotten, but it will have to wait till I have sufficient time/energy to deal with the fairly major structural changes that are required.

Under the current macro system, only headers with complex macros are likely to be misinterpreted. Are there any header issues currently affecting your projects?


JRS

  • Guest
Re: C Combatability
« Reply #23 on: August 16, 2013, 01:06:56 PM »
That is where I understood the C include option stood. After the FreeImage header translation enhancement, I took it as you would look as C header issues as a as needed basis. Asking if Jose Roca's include files could be used may have been asking too much.




Emil_halim

  • Guest
Re: C Combatability
« Reply #24 on: August 19, 2013, 07:57:47 AM »
Hi Charles,

Quote
Under the current macro system, only headers with complex macros are likely to be misinterpreted. Are there any header issues currently affecting your projects?

till now the only error i had is hierarchic header problem. i think modifying oxygen basic is not big deal when
changing #define directive to handle hierarchic header stuff.     

JRS

  • Guest
Re: C Combatability
« Reply #25 on: August 19, 2013, 10:41:42 AM »
Emil,

Would you be willing to take the lead with the C/C++ header file support with O2? I think the best way to test the header include functionality is try importing some of the common used libraries and see what blows up. The FreeImage headers was one of those unexpected deals where the function names in the include didn't match the name in the DLL.

I think it's easier on Charles when he is working with team leader to move things along rather than getting blasted by a bunch of whining forum members that have their own agenda.

John