Re: VRF- what Compiler?
From: Johannes Mulder
Hi Stan
We use Microsoft visual C++ version 4.1 for developing NT software in
general. I think our software people know very well what they are
doing, so I have not much doubt this is a good choice (for us).
I used it to write my DLL's for VEE under win95. Untill now I'm happy
with it.
> Am a fairly recent convert to the PC world and find that I need to start
> looking at VEE compiled functions (dll's).
>
> Would like recommendations as to what compiler I should be using for
> the best results.
>
> I probably need to do some work on win 3.1 for compatibility reasons
> but most work will be under Win 95/ NT4.
>
> any hints would be appreciated!
>
> thanks
>
> Stan
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Stan Bischof Hewlett Packard Company 707-577-3994 stanb@sr.hp.com
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
With kind regards,
Johannes Mulder
Philips Electron Optics tel +31 40 2766947
Building AAE-room 21 fax +31 40 2766820
P.O.B. 218
5600 MD ACHT, the Netherlands
From: Moloney Ken <p20771@po15.geg.mot.com>
To: Stan Bischof <stanb@hpnmrsb2.sr.hp.com>
Subject: RE: VRF- what Compiler?
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 96 14:22:00 MST
Stan,
As much as I hate to say so, experience has taught me to use Microsoft C++
version 2.0 or higher for NT dlls. If you ever interface with other compiled
drivers, you will find more compatibility with Microsoft than you will with
other compilers like Borland. Borland is a good compiler, but not that many
people use it to write NT drivers or dlls. HP factory reps understand
Microsoft and have little experience with other compilers. I am not a fan of
Microsoft C++ but it is easier to find support with it.
----------
From: Stan Bischof
To: hpvxd_xc
Subject: VRF- what Compiler?
Date: Thursday, November 21, 1996 11:30AM
Hi all
Am a fairly recent convert to the PC world and find that I need to start
looking at VEE compiled functions (dll's).
Would like recommendations as to what compiler I should be using for
the best results.
I probably need to do some work on win 3.1 for compatibility reasons
but most work will be under Win 95/ NT4.
any hints would be appreciated!
thanks
Stan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Stan Bischof Hewlett Packard Company 707-577-3994 stanb@sr.hp.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Greg Goebel <gvg@hpislsup.lvld.hp.com>
Subject: Re: VRF- what Compiler?
To: stanb@hpnmrsb2.sr.hp.com (Stan Bischof)
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 96 13:23:14 MST
from: Greg Goebel / HP-MXD
gvg@lvld.hp.com / 970-679-2305 / FAX 970-679-5971
to: Stan Bischof / VRf
date: Thursday, 21 November 1996 1323 MST
> Am a fairly recent convert to the PC world and find that I need to start
> looking at VEE compiled functions (dll's).
>
> Would like recommendations as to what compiler I should be using for
> the best results.
>
> I probably need to do some work on win 3.1 for compatibility reasons
> but most work will be under Win 95/ NT4.
>
> any hints would be appreciated!
>
> thanks
>
> Stan
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Stan Bischof Hewlett Packard Company 707-577-3994 stanb@sr.hp.com
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Stan:
We strongly recommend Visual C++ from Msoft. While there are plenty of
Borland advocates out there, rather than get into a discussion of the
relative merits of the two compilers I can point out as an absolute fact
that if you need help at the factory, we have lots of accumulated experience
with the MS compiler -- while nobody uses the Borland compiler here
professionally and we have to puzzle things out.
If you have more questions, let us know.
[<>] regards -- gvg
From: Johannes Mulder
Hi Stan
We use Microsoft visual C++ version 4.1 for developing NT software in
general. I think our software people know very well what they are
doing, so I have not much doubt this is a good choice (for us).
I used it to write my DLL's for VEE under win95. Untill now I'm happy
with it.
> Am a fairly recent convert to the PC world and find that I need to start
> looking at VEE compiled functions (dll's).
>
> Would like recommendations as to what compiler I should be using for
> the best results.
>
> I probably need to do some work on win 3.1 for compatibility reasons
> but most work will be under Win 95/ NT4.
>
> any hints would be appreciated!
>
> thanks
>
> Stan
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Stan Bischof Hewlett Packard Company 707-577-3994 stanb@sr.hp.com
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
With kind regards,
Johannes Mulder
Philips Electron Optics tel +31 40 2766947
Building AAE-room 21 fax +31 40 2766820
P.O.B. 218
5600 MD ACHT, the Netherlands
From: Moloney Ken <p20771@po15.geg.mot.com>
To: Stan Bischof <stanb@hpnmrsb2.sr.hp.com>
Subject: RE: VRF- what Compiler?
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 96 14:22:00 MST
Stan,
As much as I hate to say so, experience has taught me to use Microsoft C++
version 2.0 or higher for NT dlls. If you ever interface with other compiled
drivers, you will find more compatibility with Microsoft than you will with
other compilers like Borland. Borland is a good compiler, but not that many
people use it to write NT drivers or dlls. HP factory reps understand
Microsoft and have little experience with other compilers. I am not a fan of
Microsoft C++ but it is easier to find support with it.
----------
From: Stan Bischof
To: hpvxd_xc
Subject: VRF- what Compiler?
Date: Thursday, November 21, 1996 11:30AM
Hi all
Am a fairly recent convert to the PC world and find that I need to start
looking at VEE compiled functions (dll's).
Would like recommendations as to what compiler I should be using for
the best results.
I probably need to do some work on win 3.1 for compatibility reasons
but most work will be under Win 95/ NT4.
any hints would be appreciated!
thanks
Stan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Stan Bischof Hewlett Packard Company 707-577-3994 stanb@sr.hp.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Greg Goebel <gvg@hpislsup.lvld.hp.com>
Subject: Re: VRF- what Compiler?
To: stanb@hpnmrsb2.sr.hp.com (Stan Bischof)
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 96 13:23:14 MST
from: Greg Goebel / HP-MXD
gvg@lvld.hp.com / 970-679-2305 / FAX 970-679-5971
to: Stan Bischof / VRf
date: Thursday, 21 November 1996 1323 MST
> Am a fairly recent convert to the PC world and find that I need to start
> looking at VEE compiled functions (dll's).
>
> Would like recommendations as to what compiler I should be using for
> the best results.
>
> I probably need to do some work on win 3.1 for compatibility reasons
> but most work will be under Win 95/ NT4.
>
> any hints would be appreciated!
>
> thanks
>
> Stan
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Stan Bischof Hewlett Packard Company 707-577-3994 stanb@sr.hp.com
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Stan:
We strongly recommend Visual C++ from Msoft. While there are plenty of
Borland advocates out there, rather than get into a discussion of the
relative merits of the two compilers I can point out as an absolute fact
that if you need help at the factory, we have lots of accumulated experience
with the MS compiler -- while nobody uses the Borland compiler here
professionally and we have to puzzle things out.
If you have more questions, let us know.
[<>] regards -- gvg
gvg@lvld.hp.com / 970-679-2305 / FAX 970-679-5971
to: Stan Bischof / VRf
date: Thursday, 21 November 1996 1323 MST
> Am a fairly recent convert to the PC world and find that I need to start
> looking at VEE compiled functions (dll's).
>
> Would like recommendations as to what compiler I should be using for
> the best results.
>
> I probably need to do some work on win 3.1 for compatibility reasons
> but most work will be under Win 95/ NT4.
>
> any hints would be appreciated!
>
> thanks
>
> Stan
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Stan Bischof Hewlett Packard Company 707-577-3994 stanb@sr.hp.com
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Stan:
We strongly recommend Visual C++ from Msoft. While there are plenty of
Borland advocates out there, rather than get into a discussion of the
relative merits of the two compilers I can point out as an absolute fact
that if you need help at the factory, we have lots of accumulated experience
with the MS compiler -- while nobody uses the Borland compiler here
professionally and we have to puzzle things out.
If you have more questions, let us know.
[<>] regards -- gvg
From: Greg Goebel <gvg@hpislsup.lvld.hp.com>
Subject: Re: Re[2]: VRF- what Compiler?
To: stanb@hpnmrsb2.sr.hp.com (Stan Bischof)
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 96 15:00:39 MST
>
> Greg Goebel <gvg@hpislsup.lvld.hp.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > We strongly recommend Visual C++ from Msoft.
>
> Hi Greg
>
> This seems to be the (almost) unanimous recommendation, so seems OK by me.
>
> Someone remarked that I need _two_ versions if I want to produce both
> 16-bit (WIN 3.1) and 32-bit (win95/NT4 code). Is this correct?
>
> If so, what two versions should I be getting to run on my WIN95 omnibook?
According to Scott Turner, MS no longer supports 16-bit development on their
newest compilers, so it seems you can no longer get from here to there.
However, we are by no means experts on this matter ... though I will say that
building 16-bit DLLs on a 32-bit Borland compiler has been proven by at least
one customer to be quite unreliable.
>From our limited point of view all I can suggest is scrounging up an old
copy of Visual C 1.5 for Windows or something like that.
> thanks for the info
>
> Stan
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Stan Bischof Hewlett Packard Company 707-577-3994 stanb@sr.hp.com
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 15:18:34 -0500
To: Stan Bischof <stanb@hpnmrsb2.sr.hp.com>
From: "Steven M. Timian" <stimian@ara.com>
Subject: Re: VRF- what Compiler?
At 11:30 AM 11/21/96 -0800, you wrote:
>Hi all
>
>Am a fairly recent convert to the PC world and find that I need to start
>looking at VEE compiled functions (dll's).
>
>Would like recommendations as to what compiler I should be using for
>the best results.
>
>I probably need to do some work on win 3.1 for compatibility reasons
>but most work will be under Win 95/ NT4.
>
>any hints would be appreciated!
>
>thanks
>
>Stan
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Stan Bischof Hewlett Packard Company 707-577-3994 stanb@sr.hp.com
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
VEE itself is written with Microsoft C. I have used the Microsoft C in
both the Win3.1 and Win95 environments with good success. You need a 16
bit version of the compiler for VEE3.1 and a 32 bit version for VEE3.2. If
you would like some example files and compile scripts I would be happy to
provide them.
Steve Timian
Learn from yesterday,
do well the tasks of today,
and tomorrow will look after itself.
stimian@ara.com
(802) 763 - 8349 Ext 16 phone
(802) 763 - 8283 fax
Applied Research Associates
New England Division
RR1 Box 120A
South Royalton, VT 05068