"John Marshall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:72894@palm-dev-forum...
>
> On Sun, Jan 06, 2002 at 11:13:18PM -0600, Ben Combee wrote:
> > A quick note: In CodeWarrior, 'abcd' always considers 'a' to be the
> > high byte of the UInt32. The C++ parser basically sees this as a
> > base-
On Sun, Jan 06, 2002 at 11:13:18PM -0600, Ben Combee wrote:
> A quick note: In CodeWarrior, 'abcd' always considers 'a' to be the
> high byte of the UInt32. The C++ parser basically sees this as a
> base-256 number
In my opinion, 'abcd' is a portability nightmare.
Its value is implementation-d
-Original Message-
From: Ben Combee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, 7 January 2002 4:13 PM
To: Palm Developer Forum
Subject: Re: Palm and ARM (Was: PL/I for Palm ?)
> 1. We need htonl, to htons :-)
See NetHToNL, NetHToNS -- they're already part of the Palm OS AP
> 1. We need htonl, to htons :-)
See NetHToNL, NetHToNS -- they're already part of the Palm OS API, since
version 2.0.
> 2. There isn't as easy as appears. Assuming LSB to MSB order for ARM
> creatorID we have portability with string interpretation (WinDrawChars
etc),
> while with MSB to LSB ord
-Original Message-
From: Max Bian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, 7 January 2002 3:45 PM
To: Palm Developer Forum
Subject: RE: Palm and ARM (Was: PL/I for Palm ?)
> If we only use creator ID and type as UInt32, it should be portable. Some
> people get use to the the wa
If we only use creator ID and type as UInt32, it should be portable. Some
people get use to the the way like 'myCR' because it is easy to use and it
happen to look like a string ordered in the same way as big endian order on
m68k.
My hope is PalmOS may include a smaller macro in the SDK and enco
-Original Message-
From: Keith Rollin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, 7 January 2002 3:12 PM
To: Palm Developer Forum
Subject: RE: Palm and ARM (Was: PL/I for Palm ?)
> I think it all comes down to what the actual definition of what a
> creator ID, database type, or re
works
correctly, but recompiling your code subjects it to the whims of compiler
implementation dependencies.
-- Keith
-Original Message-
From: Max Bian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2002 8:28 PM
To: Palm Developer Forum
Subject: RE: Palm and ARM (Was: PL/I for Palm ?
Can we find a solution to this?
How about this: don't sort byte-by-byte. Sort by the UInt32 numbers.
My concern is some structs, for example,
struct Dummy {
Int8 a :4;
Int8 b :3;
Int8 c :1;
}
Does the endian order affect the bit order in the struct? If so, some of my
bit operation code will h
nd hopefully the last) time I have to
>disagree with you.
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Keith Rollin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Monday, 7 January 2002 2:07 PM
>To: Palm Developer Forum
>Subject: RE: Palm and ARM (Was: PL/I for Palm ?)
>
>
>> WinD
> It will be muchg safer to agree to keep creator and type in relation to
endiannes. In > > this case taking 'myCR' as creator ID, 'm' goes to LSB for
ARM and to MSB for m68k. This > is how the compiler should treat 'myCR' as
well. Currently I can't see any problem with > that approach, can you ?
Sorry, Keith, but is the first (and hopefully the last) time I have to
disagree with you.
-Original Message-
From: Keith Rollin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, 7 January 2002 2:07 PM
To: Palm Developer Forum
Subject: RE: Palm and ARM (Was: PL/I for Palm ?)
> WinDrawCh
able example. :-) )
-- Keith
-Original Message-
From: Michael Glickman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2002 6:54 PM
To: Palm Developer Forum
Subject: RE: Palm and ARM (Was: PL/I for Palm ?)
Not a major, but a concern :-)
M.
-Original Message-
From: Gavin M
Not a major, but a concern :-)
M.
-Original Message-
From: Gavin Maxwell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, 7 January 2002 1:36 PM
To: Palm Developer Forum
Subject: RE: Palm and ARM (Was: PL/I for Palm ?)
Is that really your major concern Michael? :-)
Gavin.
-Original
Is that really your major concern Michael? :-)
Gavin.
-Original Message-
From: Michael Glickman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, 7 January 2002 1:10 PM
To: Palm Developer Forum
Subject: RE: Palm and ARM (Was: PL/I for Palm ?)
-Original Message-
From: Aaron Ardiri
-Original Message-
From: Aaron Ardiri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, 5 January 2002 1:59 PM
To: Palm Developer Forum
Subject: Re: Palm and ARM (Was: PL/I for Palm ?)
> pilrc already has ARM support :)
What you probably meant is that the resources are unaffected by
-Original Message-
From: Max Bian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, 5 January 2002 3:37 AM
To: Palm Developer Forum
Subject: Re: Palm and ARM (Was: PL/I for Palm ?)
> Do we need a new puild-prc and new pilrc?
We probably do.
AFAIK, ARM GCC compiler provides ELF support
> There is something like this:
>
> http://www.tazenda.demon.co.uk/phil/arm-tools.html
>
> But I am not sure how far it is from building apps for the new ARM based
> palm. Do we need a new puild-prc and new pilrc?
pilrc already has ARM support :) and, build-prc cannot be written until the
str
There is something like this:
http://www.tazenda.demon.co.uk/phil/arm-tools.html
But I am not sure how far it is from building apps for the new ARM based palm.
Do we need a new puild-prc and new pilrc?
Max
--- Max Bian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anyone knows of any free tool sets for develop
Anyone knows of any free tool sets for developing apps for the new ARM
platform? I'd prefer something like GCC for m68k: free and great.
Max
--- Ben Combee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> As for the CodeWarrior story, currently, ARM ships their own software
> development kit. ARM licenses the
-- Original Message -
From: "Aaron Ardiri" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Palm Developer Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 2:35 PM
Subject: Re: Palm and ARM (Was: PL/I for Palm ?)
> On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, John Marshall wrote:
> > > but in both
On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 10:05:02AM +0100, Aaron Ardiri wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, John Marshall wrote:
>> Of course, what a native ARM Palm OS runtime might look like is
>> another question.
>
> question is, who said you will be able to write native ARM apps
> at all on the ARM units?
Well
On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, John Marshall wrote:
> > but in both cases there is no apparent relation to PalmOS.
>
> Of course, what a native ARM Palm OS runtime might look like is
> another question.
question is, who said you will be able to write native ARM apps
at all on the ARM units? i assume pal
On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 04:54:20PM +1100, Michael Glickman wrote:
> On the web I found references to Metrowerks Code Warrior for ARM, and GNU
> development tools for ARM
The GNU toolchain already targets ARM at least as well as it targets
m68k. (The ARM port is more modern than the m68k port, wh
> On the web I found references to Metrowerks Code Warrior for ARM, and
GNU
> development tools for ARM (will we get rid of multi-segment nightmare
?),
> but in both cases there is no apparent relation to PalmOS.
I think things will be a lot clearer at PalmSource 2002 next month.
As for the Code
-Original Message-
From: Keith Rollin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, 4 January 2002 4:21 PM
To: Palm Developer Forum
Subject: Re: Palm and ARM (Was: PL/I for Palm ?)
> If rebuilt, that's true. However, this is all taken care of under
> 68K emulation.
Oh, y
At 4:12 PM +1100 1/4/02, Michael Glickman wrote:
>From: David Fedor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> > PRCs will run anywhere, 68k or ARM, unless something incorrect was done.
>
>I dont quite undertand what that phrase meant. Do you mean, that we can use
>an app designed for m68k without a need to
-Original Message-
From: David Fedor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, 4 January 2002 10:55 AM
To: Palm Developer Forum
Subject: Re: PL/I for Palm ?
> PRCs will run anywhere, 68k or ARM, unless something incorrect was done.
Sorry, David
I dont quite undertand what that phrase m
28 matches
Mail list logo
