nanogui: Thread: NewBie Question : nanogui with Visual C++ ???

Hello there,

I'm new to this new group so hello again.

Visual C++ is my primary IDE.
I saw the nanox_3.exe.

I would like to contribute to NanoGui, developing on VC++
and testing one linux.

Does any one already tried to port the makefiles in 
order to support VC++ .

thanks,

	Yuval

: I would like to contribute to NanoGui, developing on VC++
: and testing one linux.
: 
: Does any one already tried to port the makefiles in 
: order to support VC++ .
: 
	I wasn't aware that VC++ still creates MSDOS executables.
I have prepared the MSDOS version of nanox and microwindows, and the
mcmwin.mak and mcnanox.mak are the makefiles for MSC v5.10.  There
is a bit of MASM 5.10 as well.

	You're welcome to take the latest source and create a VC project
for nanox and microwindows.  The latest source is at
	ftp://microwindows.censoft.com/pub/microwindows

Let me know if you've got questions.  I'm an occaisonal VC user and quite familiar with
the Windows development environment.  I still don't quite get what VC is
going to compile and link to, however.

Greg

> : I would like to contribute to NanoGui, developing on VC++
> : and testing one linux.
> :
> : Does any one already tried to port the makefiles in
> : order to support VC++ .
> :
> I wasn't aware that VC++ still creates MSDOS executables.
> I have prepared the MSDOS version of nanox and microwindows, and the
> mcmwin.mak and mcnanox.mak are the makefiles for MSC v5.10.  There
> is a bit of MASM 5.10 as well.
>
> You're welcome to take the latest source and create a VC project
> for nanox and microwindows.  The latest source is at
> ftp://microwindows.censoft.com/pub/microwindows
>
> Let me know if you've got questions.  I'm an occaisonal VC user and quite
familiar with
> the Windows development environment.  I still don't quite get what VC is
> going to compile and link to, however.

I think that VC 1.52 was the last one that could do 16-bit.

Regards,
Brad

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bradley D. LaRonde ####@####.####
> Sent: 23 August 1999 18:14
> To: ####@####.#### 'Yuval Yosef'; ####@####.####
> Subject: Re: NewBie Question : nanogui with Visual C++ ???
>

> I think that VC 1.52 was the last one that could do 16-bit.

I have strong memories of bouying VC2 and getting VC1.5 free and thinking
"Wow, thanks Microsoft" until I worked out that because I had Win 3.11 I
couldn't even use Version 2.0.... *sigh* I have no idea if the newer
versions of Dev Studio can do anything.... If not, how does MS expect the
professional to develop for Win3.1? And they can't say "they don't" because
if not, why do they still release IE5, etc for WIn3.11/NT3.51?

	-Darran

--
 Darran D. Rimron            European Research & Development Manager
Real Data Services, 117-119 Marlborough Road, Romford, Essex, RM7 8AR
 ####@####.####                      http://www.getreal.co.uk/
 Phone:44-1708-70-44-33 Fax:44-1708-74-88-59 Mobile:44-7808-49-25-49

First guys i apologize, i'm so used to win32
that it totally passed my mind that NT is running nanox_3.exe 
under WOW, and ofcourse VC++ do not compile 'native dos'.

Can some one pls. explain to me what are the obstacles
compiling it under win32, as i see it the assembly code
can be inlined using the __asm directive, so do we still need
MASM ? is something in nanogui architecture tied to 16 bit ?

I have never used asm, but if one will show me some directions to go
i'll be happy to play with it in my free time.

Yuval

"Darran D. Rimron" wrote:
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Bradley D. LaRonde ####@####.####
> > Sent: 23 August 1999 18:14
> > To: ####@####.#### 'Yuval Yosef'; ####@####.####
> > Subject: Re: NewBie Question : nanogui with Visual C++ ???
> >
> 
> > I think that VC 1.52 was the last one that could do 16-bit.
> 
> I have strong memories of bouying VC2 and getting VC1.5 free and thinking
> "Wow, thanks Microsoft" until I worked out that because I had Win 3.11 I
> couldn't even use Version 2.0.... *sigh* I have no idea if the newer
> versions of Dev Studio can do anything.... If not, how does MS expect the
> professional to develop for Win3.1? And they can't say "they don't" because
> if not, why do they still release IE5, etc for WIn3.11/NT3.51?
> 
>         -Darran
> 
> --
>  Darran D. Rimron            European Research & Development Manager
> Real Data Services, 117-119 Marlborough Road, Romford, Essex, RM7 8AR
>  ####@####.####                      http://www.getreal.co.uk/
>  Phone:44-1708-70-44-33 Fax:44-1708-74-88-59 Mobile:44-7808-49-25-49
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ####@####.####
> For additional commands, e-mail: ####@####.####

On Tuesday, August 24, 1999 1:51 PM, Yuval Yosef ####@####.#### wrote:
: 
: First guys i apologize, i'm so used to win32
: that it totally passed my mind that NT is running nanox_3.exe 
: under WOW, and ofcourse VC++ do not compile 'native dos'.

	Yikes!

: 
: Can some one pls. explain to me what are the obstacles
: compiling it under win32, as i see it the assembly code
: can be inlined using the __asm directive, so do we still need
: MASM ? is something in nanogui architecture tied to 16 bit ?

	Why the heck would you want to compile it under Win32?? 
The whole purpose of MicroWindows was to emulate win32 on other systems!!

There's no architecture problems, the code runs on 16 bit ELKS and
16 bit MSDOS and 32 bit Linux.  The asm's just there to do dirty
deeds that C can't always do.

Greg

The following is provided for enjoyment only:

: I have strong memories of bouying VC2 and getting VC1.5 free and thinking
: "Wow, thanks Microsoft" until I worked out that because I had Win 3.11 I
: couldn't even use Version 2.0.... *sigh* I have no idea if the newer
: versions of Dev Studio can do anything.... If not, how does MS expect the
: professional to develop for Win3.1?

	MS: "Professionals don't develop for Win3.1 or any other 16 bit systems"

 And they can't say "they don't" because
: if not, why do they still release IE5, etc for WIn3.11/NT3.51?

	MS: "Developing for a platform and using a platform are two different things"
	MS: "We have decided that 16 bit systems are out.  So you may not develop"
	MS: "for them any longer.  However, if *our* customers won't upgrade, they"
	MS: "are right.  We will provide them with what they want.  You are not"
	MS: "our customer.  You are only a developer."

> -----Original Message-----

>>  And they can't say "they don't" because
> : if not, why do they still release IE5, etc for WIn3.11/NT3.51?
> 
>MS: Developing for a platform and using a platform are two different 
>    things. We have decided that 16 bit systems are out.  So you 
>    may not develop for them any longer.  However, if *our* customers
>    won't upgrade, they are right.  We will provide them with what they 
>    want.  You are not our customer.  You are only a developer."

[reformatted to squeeze into my line-length, no offence ment]

Me: So, your customers are right and my customers are wrong because 
    they also run Windows 3.11? What makes my customer not your 
    customer also, they paid for the copy of WFWG they run, it wasn't 
    free in some luckydip.  You will provide *YOUR* customer with what 
    they want, they want to run my application, provide that then....  
    And If I'm only a developer, not a customer, sell me a 16bit 
    compiler so I can be a customer too.... ANd who said that I don't 
    already have Win16 running IE4 on my P2, eh?  So what makes me 
    different from jack and jill public?

	-Hypothetically yours, Darran ;)

--
 Darran D. Rimron            European Research & Development Manager
Real Data Services, 117-119 Marlborough Road, Romford, Essex, RM7 8AR
 ####@####.####                      http://www.getreal.co.uk/
 Phone:44-1708-70-44-33 Fax:44-1708-74-88-59 Mobile:44-7808-49-25-49