Re: DCL versus Unix CLIs, was: Re: File output like Unix
- From: "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 17:51:05 -0400
Rich Alderson wrote:
koehler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Bob Koehler) writes:
Except, of course, that all the UNIX compilers have no idea what
thier input is without looking at the extension.
Oh, horseshit.
That's certainly true of gcc. It's a "compiler suite" and does different things depending on the extension. ".c" tells it to compile C source. ".f" tells it FORTRAN, ".cc" is, I believe" C++ and so on.
It's a bit of a kludge and the "man page" uses 191 pages to document all the command line options, switches, etc, etc. Fortunately, if all you want to do is build freeware packages, the make file generally takes care of the gcc command line.
To accuse "all" Unix compilers probably is horse shit.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: DCL versus Unix CLIs, was: Re: File output like Unix
- From: Richard
- Re: DCL versus Unix CLIs, was: Re: File output like Unix
- References:
- Re: DCL versus Unix CLIs, was: Re: File output like Unix
- From: Bob Koehler
- Re: DCL versus Unix CLIs, was: Re: File output like Unix
- From: Rich Alderson
- Re: DCL versus Unix CLIs, was: Re: File output like Unix
- Prev by Date: Re: Miltu-core CPUs, threads vs AST driven approaches
- Next by Date: Re: DCL versus Unix CLIs, was: Re: File output like Unix
- Previous by thread: Re: DCL versus Unix CLIs, was: Re: File output like Unix
- Next by thread: Re: DCL versus Unix CLIs, was: Re: File output like Unix
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|