Re: Why some PC C compilers are useless

sdm7g@aemsun.med.Virginia.EDU (Steven D. Majewski)
Thu, 14 May 1992 14:08:06 GMT

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Why some PC C compilers are useless sjg@zen.void.oz.au (1992-05-07)
Re: Why some PC C compilers are useless cliffc@rice.edu (1992-05-08)
Re: Why some PC C compilers are useless sjg@melb.bull.oz.au (1992-05-11)
Re: Why some PC C compilers are useless Zoid@mindlink.bc.ca (1992-05-11)
Re: Why some PC C compilers are useless bobmon@sandshark.cs.indiana.edu (Bob Montante) (1992-05-12)
Re: Why some PC C compilers are useless sjg@melb.bull.oz.au (1992-05-13)
Re: Why some PC C compilers are useless sdm7g@aemsun.med.Virginia.EDU (1992-05-14)
| List of all articles for this month |
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
From: sdm7g@aemsun.med.Virginia.EDU (Steven D. Majewski)
Followup-To: comp.lang.c
Keywords: C, MSDOS
Organization: University of Virginia
References: 92-05-042 92-05-073
Date: Thu, 14 May 1992 14:08:06 GMT

Bob Montante <bobmon@sandshark.cs.indiana.edu> writes:
>If I recall correctly, the Turbo C compiler accepts programs with Unix-
>style newlines --- BUT the Turbo C preprocessor chokes on them!


I discovered that I had to edit+save all of the .h files ( but none
of the .c files ) to compile correctly. ( BCC 3.0 )
So it sounds like a more specific bug: i.e. related to how #include's
are processed, not a *general* preprocessor problem.


- Steve Majewski University of Virginia Physiology sdm7g@Virginia.EDU
[I've sent followups to comp.lang.c, since this is no longer a general
compilers topic. -John]
--

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.