On 05/28/2010 11:49 PM, Alain Mouette wrote:
>
> I use Borland C 3.1 regularly on FreeDOS... have you tryed to configure
> the the lib directories in the IDE?
>
Hi Alain,
Yes, I set the directories and for some reason when I try to compile,
the IDE reports that it "can't open XXX.lib" when I know
Em 28-05-2010 08:46, Jim Lemon escreveu:
> I have been using the Borland C compiler for some years, but ran into a
> problem with version 1.0 of FreeDOS. Since I upgraded from 0.9something,
> the IDE can no longer find libraries or object files that are not in the
> current directory, nor can I ma
On 05/28/2010 01:19 PM, Ralf A. Quint wrote:
> ...
> I personally prefer Borlands C/C++ 3.1 myself, it's still after all
> those years the most usable DOS C/C++ compiler that still runs on 16
> bit DOS, though unfortunately, only the older version of Turbo C++
> 1.01 is available from Borland's/Im
At 05:52 PM 5/27/2010, Martin Woodhouse wrote:
>Hi Conan
>
>That wouldn't be Borland C, would it? I built an entire e-book
>writing-reading-publishing suite for DOS using Borland C in 1989-91
No, that wouldn't.
As already mentioned, the compiler he is looking for is now called
"Digital Mars C/C
Hi Conan
That wouldn't be Borland C, would it? I built an entire e-book
writing-reading-publishing suite for DOS using Borland C in 1989-91
Cheers
Martwww.martin-woodhouse.co.uk
From: Conan Kudo
I was wondering if anyone knows more than there is on wikipedia? I'd be
interested in findi
On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 23:29 -0500, Conan Kudo (ニール・ゴンパ) wrote:
> The compiler (for DOS) hasn't seen any major updates since 1999.
> Though that may not be as much of a problem for DOS, but OpenWatcom
> would be a better choice I think.
That's fine, I'm only interested in the original Zorland/Zort
At 09:29 PM 5/26/2010,
=?ISO-2022-JP?B?Q29uYW4gS3VkbyAoGyRCJUshPCVrISYlNCVzJVEbKEIp?= wrote:
>The compiler (for DOS) hasn't seen any major updates since 1999.
>Though that may not be as much of a problem for DOS, but OpenWatcom
>would be a better choice I think.
Sorry, but the "compiler" has be
The compiler (for DOS) hasn't seen any major updates since 1999. Though that
may not be as much of a problem for DOS, but OpenWatcom would be a better
choice I think.
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 11:22 PM, Ralf A. Quint wrote:
> At 05:15 PM 5/26/2010,
> =?ISO-2022-JP?B?Q29uYW4gS3VkbyAoGyRCJUshPCVrISY
At 05:15 PM 5/26/2010,
=?ISO-2022-JP?B?Q29uYW4gS3VkbyAoGyRCJUshPCVrISYlNCVzJVEbKEIp?= wrote:
>The Zortech Compiler is now known as the Digital Mars C/C++
>compiler. I'd recommend you stay away from it.
And why would that be?
Ralf
---
The Zortech Compiler is now known as the Digital Mars C/C++ compiler. I'd
recommend you stay away from it.
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 6:15 PM, <
alex.bu...@munted.org.uk> wrote:
> Many moons ago I used to code applications using a C compiler
> (definitely not a C++ compiler) going by the name of Zo
Many moons ago I used to code applications using a C compiler
(definitely not a C++ compiler) going by the name of Zorland or Zortech,
can't remember which one is right.
I was wondering if anyone knows more than there is on wikipedia? I'd be
interested in finding out more about that compiler and
11 matches
Mail list logo
