Re: Help on interfacing STk with C in Win95

From: Erick Gallesio <Erick.Gallesio_at_unice.fr>
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 1999 14:37:55 +0200 (CEST)

Maria P. Albuquerque writes:

> Some sub questions are:
> - is it possible at all in Win95? or is it better to port to Unix?

My advice is that it is always better to port to Unix ;-)
I have spent too much time with the crazy Win32 development
environment. This was a nightmare compared to Unix.

> - will it be better to try using FFI (even if in the STk manual says it is
> only working for some Unix's) or using sockets?

socket should work on Linux for 4.0. I have integrated the excellent
work done by Steve Pruitt for socket. I have not tested it intensively
but it seems to work now. Note that Steve implementation uses STklos
and is a little bit different from what is in the documentation (Unix
implementation continue to uses the original implementation which is
faster and which don't impose a penalty on other IO once you have used
sockets). I'm not completely happy with that but I didn't found time
to integrate things better.

> - DLL support is working in Win95?
>

Steve (always him ;-) has provided patches for DLL support. I have
applied them and it should work. I said "should" because I was not
able to test it. I have really tried several time to understand how
the DLL stuff works on Win32, but it seems too contorted that I have
always give up before having something running. OK, I must admit that
my machine is an old Pentium with few memory, definitively not the
kind of machine for Win32 development).

Anyway, if it doesn't work, I suppose that it is close too. Since I
think I have make something very similar to Steve version.

> or
> - all these questions will be answered in release 4.0 and thus when will
> it be released?
>

I have made a pre-RPM one hour ago. I have two or three minor things
to do and retry it on Windows. I hope to have something this evening.

>
> P.S. Just to let you know: I have been using STk 3.99.4 in Win95 (with Tk)
> and there were almost no crash :-)
>

Thanks for the info (even if don't really understant how I must
interpret "almost no crash" and it's associated smiley ;-)

                -- Erick
Received on Fri Sep 03 1999 - 21:54:29 CEST