Hi Will,

You wrote to David Noon:

WH>DN> The Compuserve announcement was that all 3 platforms were to
WH>DN> receive the upgrade, to try and bring the grammars into line. After
WH>DN> all, C++ is the most portable language in computing.

WH>My word was from Dwayne Moore at IBM Toronto Labs, but he is pushing
WH>the 4.0 beta support program, so it might be skewed.

WH>DN> Well, they couldn't possibly make it any slower.

WH>Wanna bet?

:-)

WH>DN> My main hope is that they have not tied it to LPEX to perform
WH>DN> builds. I would still like to be able to run NMAKE myself.

WH>There has been a fair amount of discussion in the beta group about
WH>just that.  Apparently, a lot of folks are of the same mind because a.
WH>the new LPEX is broken and b. editors seem to be more of a religion
WH>that a tool to a lot of programmers.  My sense of it is that the
WH>makemake process will still support nmake and our own make files which
WH>would imply compiler access.  I have seen a lot of people who are
WH>disenchanted with the new compiler technology - no intermediate object
WH>files, etc., as the default for example - who want to do just what you
WH>suggest.  Besides, automating a GUI-only interface would be wellnigh
WH>impossible.

If I'm happy with the editor I already use across multiple other
compilers/languages, why should I be forced to learn a new one just for
one compiler?

WH>Personally, I'm counting on the same make functionality.  With a lot
WH>of the work I do the customer assumes long term support responsibility
WH>(even when I tell them I'll work cheap) and I'd much rather teach Joe
WH>NumbNuts how to type 'nmake -f makefile' than to use the visual ide
WH>.

I hope so too.

WH>HEY! Talk about timing!  Just saw and announcement letter on the web:

WH>VACPP for OS/2, NT. AIX announce, part # 30L8360, ship date 12/18/1998
WH>- no prices yet, tho.
WH>http://www2.ibmlink.ibm.com/cgi-bin/master?xh=WrO7uOaQeRQLSb0USenGnN9332&req

Spotted over on the Inet (these are from comp.os.os2.programmer.tools):-

From: "Trevor Hemsley" 
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.programmer.tools
Subject: Re: VAC++ 4 coming

On Wed, 16 Dec 1998 03:12:04 -0500, Peter Fitzsimmons wrote:

->Tim Erickson wrote:
->>
->> I got home from work and found this announcement in my email:
->>
->>  http://www.ibmlink.ibm.com/canalets&parms=H_A98-0842
->>
->> Dec 18 is the release date for VAC++ V4
->>
->
->My reading of this is that OS/2 and NT support are in the same box
->(finally!). I hope this is the case.

The announcement letter says it comes on *5* CD-ROMs! One for VAC++ 4.0
for NT, one for IBM C/C++ 3.6 for NT, two more for the same thing for OS/2
and one extra for luck (I've forgotten what was on that). VAC++ 4.0 for
OS/2 says it wants 630MB and IBM C/C++ 3.6 wants 430MB. A gigabyte for a
compiler! I thought VAC++ 3.0's 200MB was pretty excessive ;-)


Trevor Hemsley, London, UK
(Trevor-Hemsley{at}dial.pipex.com or 75704.2477{at}compuserve.com)


[end first]

and also:

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.programmer.tools
From: "Mike Ruskai" 
Subject: Re: VAC++ 4 coming

On Wed, 16 Dec 1998 03:12:04 -0500, Peter Fitzsimmons wrote:

>Tim Erickson wrote:
>>
>> I got home from work and found this announcement in my email:
>>
>>  http://www.ibmlink.ibm.com/canalets&parms=H_A98-0842
>>
>> Dec 18 is the release date for VAC++ V4
>>
>
>My reading of this is that OS/2 and NT support are in the same box
>(finally!). I hope this is the case.
>
>I have no interest in any of the visual stuff -- I just want what they
>are calling "version 3.6 of the c/c++" compiler for OS2/NT.
>
>Let's hope the upgrade price is reasonable ($200 max).

I'm not sure if Win32 and OS/2 are in the same box, but the upgrade price is
$249, at least if you buy directly from IBM.


--
 - Mike

Remove 'spambegone' to send e-mail.

[End second post]

Some familiar names to long term OS2PROG followers there...

George

 * SLMR 2.1a * Wishing you a Happy Christmas and a Peaceful New Year

--- Maximus/2 3.01