Andy Ross wrote:
> Erik Hofman wrote:
> > Err, I must confess I actaully found it! (Man, MipsPro has way too
> > many compiler switches, it was hidden int the
> > -LANG:ansi-for-init-scope=ON flag).
> >
> > Anyway, I won't bug you any more with this :-)
>
> Doh! Too late, I already change
Erik Hofman wrote:
> Err, I must confess I actaully found it! (Man, MipsPro has way too
> many compiler switches, it was hidden int the
> -LANG:ansi-for-init-scope=ON flag).
>
> Anyway, I won't bug you any more with this :-)
Doh! Too late, I already changed it. :(
It turns out the MSVC ha
Erik Hofman wrote:
>>
>> And honestly, I refuse to believe that Microsoft and SGI ship
>> compilers years out of compliance with the specification. There's got
>> to be a way to fix this without making me grumpy. :)
> Start beliving my friend, it's never too late ;-)
Err, I must confess I ac
Andy Ross wrote:
> > Heh Heh, are you seriously trying to tell us that someone who can
> > produce an FDM out of thin air can't do a find and replace on
> > for(int i=
>
> Heh, wrong test. This is a recreational project, so you need to
> measure "grumpiness" instead of productivity. This c
D Luff wrote:
> Andy Ross writes:
>
>
>>But this also hit on a problem that Christian had with MSVC (along
>>with a goodly number of slams, some justified and some not, about my
>>coding style). I've been living the last few years under the
>>impression that all C++ compilers supported the fo
Andy Ross wrote:
> Erik Hofman wrote:
>
> Honestly, if compilers vary this much, doesn't it seem simpler to just
> pick one? There's a gcc variant available on both these platforms
> which can compile fgfs just fine. Is it really worth the time and
> grief (to me, definitely non-negligible) t
> Honestly, if compilers vary this much, doesn't it seem simpler to just
> pick one? There's a gcc variant available on both these platforms
> which can compile fgfs just fine.
The last time I looked at gcc on IRIX (2.95.2/3) you didn't want to use use
it for more than just for fun. Several time
> for(int i=0; i for(int i=0; i Honestly, if compilers vary this much, doesn't it seem simpler to just
> pick one?
It's not too bad an exercise to make the code completely cross-platform
capable. Have a look at the paper I mentioned:
http://jsbsim.sf.net/JSBSimCUJ.PDF
Jon
_
Curtis L. Olson writes:
>
>> [Preemptive note to Norman: this is a real argument, about real code,
>> with real impact on development time. It is not a platform
>> flame. :)]
>
>Norman is a gcc guy most of the time ... he's big into cygwin ... one
>of these days he'll realize that running all
Erik Hofman wrote:
> Did you notice this previous post of mine:
Um... no. :) Must have missed it in the @Home/AT&T brouhaha. Sorry.
> > For who it concerned,
> >
> > I have placed a patch for YASim with the nessercery updates for
> > IRIX at: http://www.a1.nl/~ehofman/fgfs/download/YASim-I
Andy,
Thanks, the FlightGear code has been synced with your latest changes.
Curt.
Andy Ross writes:
> OK, I've finally cobbled YASim back into a releasable state, so
> there's a new source distribution available at:
>
> http://12.232.180.89/andy/yasim-0.1.1.tar.gz
>
> Eventually, this wi
Andy Ross wrote:
> OK, I've finally cobbled YASim back into a releasable state, so
> there's a new source distribution available at:
>
>http://12.232.180.89/andy/yasim-0.1.1.tar.gz
>
Hi Andy,
Did you notice this previous post of mine:
> For who it concerned,
>
> I have placed a patch f
12 matches
Mail list logo
