On Friday, 99/01/08, Darin McBride wrote to David Noon about "VisualAge C++
for OS/2" as follows:

Hi Darin,

DM>  DN> I specifically use namespaces quite a bit. Neither VAC++ 3.0
(+CSD's) nor
DM>  DN> emx (0.9c and earlier) support them. As a result, Watcom has become my
DM>  DN> reference compiler for C++.
DM> 
DM> Interesting... I moved away from Watcom (10.6) to EMX 
DM> specifically for C++ support.

But the C++ grammar supported by EMX is archaic, especially compared to
Watcom.

DM> I don't use namespaces nor exceptions, but I *do* use the STL.

STL is mostly coded for use with "lowest common denominator" compilers. All
it needs is template support and you are away. Besides, I can code my own
sort routines in C++. ... :-)

DM> Watcom worked for 
DM> this, but wasn't worth the hassle of non-standard make 
DM> files for the difference.

The makefile format doesn't bother me, as long as the compiler's make
utility works with it. I seldom even read the makefiles.

DM> I find much more help/support available for EMX.

I have received little support from Watcom and no support (as I haven't
needed any) for EMX. If I really fear I'll need support I will use an IBM
product. In all my years in software the only two system software companies I
have found with decent technical support have been IBM and Honeywell.

DM> Since that move, I've switched a large part of my OS/2 work to Visual
DM> Age.   Why?

Because you work for IBM and get the compiler for free.

DM> 'Cuz I need it for work, so I have a large pool of  makefiles
DM> and code to pool from if I need something.  It  also is easier to write
DM> API calls in (i.e., I can *almost*  cut&paste from the API docs into my
DM> code).

You can do this with Watcom, just as readily as with VAC++. I even use LPEX
to edit my C/C++ source code, whether using Watcom or VAC++.

DM> This is in part  due to the fact that EMX doesn't have the full
DM> OS/2 API  available (i.e., #define'ing something then #include'ing  OS2.H
DM> doesn't give all the APIs).

Only the more esoteric API's are omitted from the EMX package, AFAIK. It
should work fine provided you stick to OS/2 2.0 API calls, which accounts for
the bulk of the current API.

DM> Also, when writing JNI,  I'm not sure if
DM> javah will create the right headers for  EMX...

I thought javah was supposed to produce ISO/ANSI standard C source.

Regards

Dave


 * KWQ/2 1.2i * OS/2: Opens up Windows, shuts up Gates.

--- Maximus/2 3.01