🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <713416158snx@tgm.CAM.ORG> eric@tgm.CAM.ORG (Eric Trepanier) writes:
>Hello Everyone,
>
>I'm not sure I got this right, but from where I stand, it seems like there
>are two gnu c++ compiler, wich are mutually incompatible.  I'm real new
>to this and I would be very greatful if someone would explain what are
>the differences, the pros and cons of each, and what if anything else,
>is required to get them running (make?, os/2 toolkit?).  Apparently, one
>of them runs under EMX.  I have no idea what it is.  Is this some kind
>of shell alternative to CMD.EXE?

I'm not quite sure what EMX is.  It appears to be a .DLL file which
allows you to use Unix-style executable files on other systems.  The
emx.dll does this for OS/2.  There is also an EMX DOS-extender for
MS-DOS.  The EMX/Gcc compiler produces Unix-like object, libraries,
and executables - wrapped in something so that OS/2 can read it.  It
uses ports of the Unix linker and librarian and debugger.

The other port (gcc/2) doesn't do this.  It produces OS/2 standard
object, libraries, and executables.  It uses the OS/2 linker.  I don't
know if libaraians are available for OS/2 2.0 libs.  There is no
debugger yet.  This code can never run under DOS.

>Also, can I use emacs with any of these two environments?

Yes.  Although emacs uses the emx.dll (it was compiled with emx/gcc),
you can still use gcc/2 with it installed.  I do.

>Will I be able to make PM application with either one of these compilers?

It'll be much easier with gcc/2.  emx/gcc has problems interfacing
with the complete OS/2 2.0 API.  gcc/2 uses normal libraries, so it
can use the libraries and headers that come with the IBM Toolkit to
provide the functions that aren't built-in.  emx/gcc can do that, but
it takes some work.

>I already downloaded the emacs and gnugcc21 archives, but I'm mesmerized at
>the size of those things - especially emacs.  Does it really require 9Mb?
>Can I use emacs without the lisp stuff?

Yes, emacs is big.  If you know it well, you might be able to delete
some of the lisp stuff, but I'd recommend not doing so.  The lisp code
is what emacs executes when you perform various functions.  Deleting
it will remove features from emacs.

If you need a limited emacs, you can download Micro-Emacs.  It is MUCH
smaller, and it does a lot less.  But it may be enough for simply
editing files.

>As you can tell, I'm quite new to all this and any help you can provide
>me will be greatly appreciated.  Is there anybody out there who is
>actively using either one, who would be kind enough to give me some much
>needed advice?

I activele use emacs/os2.  I will be using gcc/2 a lot once I get the
IBM toolkit.  I'm ordering it this weekend - $79 + $6 s&h from
Programmer's Paradise.
-- 
   |)  David Charlap           "I don't even represent myself
  /|_  dic5340@hertz.njit.edu   sometimes so NJIT is right out!.
 ((|,)
  ~|~  Hi! I am a .signature virus, copy me into your .signature file.