Go to bottom


category: general [glöplog]
manually controlled makefiles that get automated with configure scripts in the end anyway vs. automated makefiles wrapped with software project settings.... hmm, though choice :`(
dila, gcc once gave me this:

Code:mov ecx, [ebp + 14h] mov ecx, [ebp + 20h]
added on the 2007-09-01 17:32:52 by kb_ kb_
Keeps the rust from ecx
added on the 2007-09-01 17:51:33 by Joghurt Joghurt
It's some cache-optimizing trick, I reckon.
added on the 2007-09-01 19:43:57 by doomdoom doomdoom
I recently had an argument with someone, who wanted, like me, to use Linux for software development... me: "PLEASE DON'T. YOUR VS EXPRESS WORKS! DOCUMENTED WELL. WHY BREAK STUFF? DON'T DO THIS WITHOUT A GOOD REASON!!!". Uh, he doesn't listen... now i shall probably have even more stuff to fix for him.

Rubicante: crude file contents search (aka grep) is the best help for compile and link problems... really, on whatever system you are. It gets you fixed within minutes.
added on the 2007-09-01 19:51:49 by eye eye
When you're just experimenting you can use processing to keep compiler hell at a safe distance. Installing a library is as simple as extracting it to the 'libraries' folder.
added on the 2007-09-01 20:11:24 by linde linde
wrong link of course! http://processing.org/
added on the 2007-09-01 20:13:56 by linde linde
kb, as sad as it is, there are people that hump stuffed penguins for living and need to use GCC to compile stuff... :)

and fuckings to the guy reviving this thread...
added on the 2007-09-02 01:16:04 by raer raer


Go to top