Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!rutgers!mtune!mtunb!dmt From: dmt@mtunb.ATT.COM (Dave Tutelman) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc Subject: Re: Turbo C questions Message-ID: <1011@mtunb.ATT.COM> Date: Tue, 28-Jul-87 08:30:55 EDT Article-I.D.: mtunb.1011 Posted: Tue Jul 28 08:30:55 1987 Date-Received: Wed, 29-Jul-87 05:46:05 EDT References: <572@rlgvax.UUCP> Reply-To: dmt@mtunb.UUCP (Dave Tutelman) Organization: AT&T Information Systems - Lincroft, NJ Lines: 51 In article <572@rlgvax.UUCP> cliff@rlgvax.UUCP writes: >I've been using TurboC productively now for a few weeks, and have just >taken the opportunity to examine the interactive environment. Perhaps I'm >missing something, but I really can't see the utility of it, especially >since the editor is single window/buffer. Are projects any better than >makefiles (the deficiencies of Turbo's make aside)? > >Can somebody reveal some advantage of tc over tcc and a good editor to me? > I can think of two reasons to use the interactive environment (and two reasons not to): + The "message" window not only contains an error listing for the most recent make, it will bounce the cursor in the "edit" window to correspond to the offense highlighted in the "message" window. Of course, if you never get compiler errors, this won't matter to you :-) + The "project"-make file is much simpler to prepare than a real makefile. - The "project"-make facility is much less capable than a real makefile. If all you do is C-compile and link, then project is fine; if you want to do anything else (make documentation, make archive, MASM, etc), then you need a real make. - Depending on what I'm programming, the lack of a second edit window can be a real bummer (e.g.- anything complex enough to require its own header file). My own modus operandi is to use the integrated environment for most of my work, but use a multi-window editor for (1)preparation of files initially, and (2) any restructure of the program that has significant related ramifications in more than one file. I've also noted that: + For debugging programs that receive their input interactively (that is, after they're called and running), the "one-keystroke Run" of the integrated environment is a small but worthwhile advantage. (Really, the advantage is one keystroke back to the editor, WHERE YOU WERE BEFORE.) - For debugging programs that get their input as command line arguments, I usually have to "escape to DOS" to do any worthwhile debugging. This disadvantage cancels the ease of getting back to where you were in the editor. >| Cliff Joslyn, Computer Consoles Inc., Reston, Virgnia, but my opinions. >| UUCP: ..!seismo!rlgvax!cliff +---------------------------------------------------------------+ | Dave Tutelman | | Physical - AT&T - Lincroft, NJ | | Logical - ...ihnp4!mtuxo!mtunb!dmt | | Audible - (201) 576 2442 | +---------------------------------------------------------------+