LFS for Windows apps

[Mr. Travis]

What's the best inexpensive C compiler for Windows with large file
support (LFS)?

Preferably one where adding LFS to an EXE is as painless as possible.

I already have an old Borland compiler as well as gcc, but neither of
those seem to offer LFS.

[Jack Klein]

On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 19:21:57 -0400, Mr. Travis
<mr******@special.nospam> wrote in comp.lang.c:

What's the best inexpensive C compiler for Windows with large file
support (LFS)?

Preferably one where adding LFS to an EXE is as painless as possible.

I already have an old Borland compiler as well as gcc, but neither of
those seem to offer LFS.

There is no such thing as "LFS" defined by the C language. If you
have questions about particular features that might or might not be
present in C implementations for a particular platform (Windows), you
need to ask in a group for that particular platform. It's off-topic
here because it's not a language issue.

Try news:comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32

--
Jack Klein
Home: http://JK-Technology.Com
FAQs for
comp.lang.c http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
comp.lang.c++ http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/
alt.comp.lang.learn.c-c++
http://www.contrib.andrew.cmu.edu/~a...FAQ-acllc.html

[Mr. Travis]

In article <on********************************@4ax.com>,
ja*******@spamcop.net says...

On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 19:21:57 -0400, Mr. Travis
<mr******@special.nospam> wrote in comp.lang.c:

What's the best inexpensive C compiler for Windows with large file
support (LFS)?

Preferably one where adding LFS to an EXE is as painless as possible.

I already have an old Borland compiler as well as gcc, but neither of
those seem to offer LFS.

There is no such thing as "LFS" defined by the C language. If you
have questions about particular features that might or might not be
present in C implementations for a particular platform (Windows), you
need to ask in a group for that particular platform. It's off-topic
here because it's not a language issue.

Try news:comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32

Large file support is a compiler (or at least a linker) issue, not an OS
issue. The issue arises regardless of the target platform.

In the time it took you to write that whiny complaint, you could have
composed an answer. You're clearly more interested in being an
OBSTRUCTIONIST ASSHOLE than engaging in constructive conversation.

PLONK

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <da**********@pita.alt.net>,
Mr. Travis <mi**********@travserver.travdom> wrote:

In article <on********************************@4ax.com>,
ja*******@spamcop.net says...

On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 19:21:57 -0400, Mr. Travis
<mr******@special.nospam> wrote in comp.lang.c:

> What's the best inexpensive C compiler for Windows with large file
> support (LFS)?
>
> Preferably one where adding LFS to an EXE is as painless as possible.
>
> I already have an old Borland compiler as well as gcc, but neither of
> those seem to offer LFS.

There is no such thing as "LFS" defined by the C language. If you
have questions about particular features that might or might not be
present in C implementations for a particular platform (Windows), you
need to ask in a group for that particular platform. It's off-topic
here because it's not a language issue.

Try news:comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32

Large file support is a compiler (or at least a linker) issue, not an OS
issue. The issue arises regardless of the target platform.

In the time it took you to write that whiny complaint, you could have
composed an answer. You're clearly more interested in being an
OBSTRUCTIONIST ASSHOLE than engaging in constructive conversation.

You obviously don't understand comp.lang.c

[Randy Howard]

"Mr." Travis wrote
(in article <da**********@pita.alt.net>):

In article <on********************************@4ax.com>,
ja*******@spamcop.net says...

On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 19:21:57 -0400, Mr. Travis
<mr******@special.nospam> wrote in comp.lang.c:

What's the best inexpensive C compiler for Windows with large file
support (LFS)?

Preferably one where adding LFS to an EXE is as painless as possible.

I already have an old Borland compiler as well as gcc, but neither of
those seem to offer LFS.
There is no such thing as "LFS" defined by the C language. If you
have questions about particular features that might or might not be
present in C implementations for a particular platform (Windows), you
need to ask in a group for that particular platform. It's off-topic
here because it's not a language issue.

Try news:comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32

Large file support is a compiler (or at least a linker) issue, not an OS
issue. The issue arises regardless of the target platform.

Only in the sense that no matter what the limit for file size
is, it's theoretically possible to try to create a file larger
than that supported. Even if you had 256-bit file offsets, you
could still (in theory) create a file larger than that.

But, in the real world, quite a few platforms support 64-bit
offsets natively. It is much more a file system issue than a
compiler issue. "LFS" never comes up on many of them. For
example, 64-bit Linux does not require anything special, but
32-bit Linux does. None of this has anything to do with c.l.c,
which is why Jack said to try another group. In fact, support
for "large files" is already in Windows, just not using standard
APIs, which are also off topic here.
In the time it took you to write that whiny complaint, you could have
composed an answer.
What makes you think Jack (or anyone else) automatically knows
the right answer? more importantly, in a newsgroup where a
reasonable percentage of the readers do not know (i.e. in a
group where the subject is off-topic), and incorrect response is
much less likely to be caught be the regulars. That is why it
is important to ask the question in an appropriate group, so
that you get the best results and do not receive incorrect or
misleading information.
You're clearly more interested in being an
OBSTRUCTIONIST ASSHOLE than engaging in constructive conversation.

PLONK

Here's a free clue: Klein is now in one killfile, you will
probably be in dozens by the end of the day.
--
Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR)

[Sensei]

Mr. Travis wrote:

Large file support is a compiler (or at least a linker) issue, not an OS
issue. The issue arises regardless of the target platform.
It's one of the most false assumptions. File size limit so large file
support *depends* on the operating system and the file system in use,
and it's really simple to understand.

Since I feel good today (*), I will tell you where to seek.

Here's your windows-only pointer: http://tinyurl.com/2ozuo

If you're interested in learning something from who knows more than you,
just googling for ``file system limit'' would suffice, and of course,
wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_file_systems

There you'll know how to deal with file system limitations, inherently
platform-dependent. You would have known just looking on the wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_File_Support --- the limits depend on
your OS, as pointed out by the link on lfs on wiki:

``To support writing portable code that makes use of LFS where possible,
C standard library authors devised mechanisms that, depending on
preprocessor constants, transparently redefined the functions to the
64-bit large file aware ones.''

Anyway, I don't think you'll EVER deal with FS limits on NTFS and other
file systems.
In the time it took you to write that whiny complaint, you could have
composed an answer. You're clearly more interested in being an
OBSTRUCTIONIST ASSHOLE than engaging in constructive conversation.

PLONK

(*) Telling someone he's an asshole for pointing you to the right place
to ask, denotes you're stupid. He knows you're on windows, since you
posted about EXE, which are JUST ON MS PLATFORMS (and os/2 but probably
you don't know), and of course, you're using MicroPlanet Gravity, which
is on MS platforms.

Be kind, if you're not a stupid person, you understand what I mean.

[CBFalconer]

"Mr. Travis" wrote:

ja*******@spamcop.net says...

.... snip ...

There is no such thing as "LFS" defined by the C language. If
you have questions about particular features that might or might
not be present in C implementations for a particular platform
(Windows), you need to ask in a group for that particular
platform. It's off-topic here because it's not a language issue.

Try news:comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32

Large file support is a compiler (or at least a linker) issue, not
an OS issue. The issue arises regardless of the target platform.

In the time it took you to write that whiny complaint, you could
have composed an answer. You're clearly more interested in being an
OBSTRUCTIONIST ASSHOLE than engaging in constructive conversation.

PLONK

You being a bovaristic, excerebrose, wlatsome, xylocephalous,
yirning zoophyte who is unable to recognize assistance when
offered, will not be seen here again. PLONK.

--
"If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, don't use
the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article. Click on
"show options" at the top of the article, then click on the
"Reply" at the bottom of the article headers." - Keith Thompson

[Mark McIntyre]

On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 19:43:18 -0400, in comp.lang.c , Mr. Travis
<mi**********@travserver.travdom> wrote:

In article <on********************************@4ax.com>,
ja*******@spamcop.net says...

On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 19:21:57 -0400, Mr. Travis
<mr******@special.nospam> wrote in comp.lang.c:

> What's the best inexpensive C compiler for Windows with large file
> support (LFS)?
There is no such thing as "LFS" defined by the C language. If you
have questions about particular features that might or might not be
present in C implementations for a particular platform (Windows),

Try news:comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32

Large file support is a compiler (or at least a linker) issue, not an OS
issue. The issue arises regardless of the target platform.

Its also language-independent, and nothing to do with the C language.
In the time it took you to write that whiny complaint, you could have
composed an answer.
He did. See the bits above.
You're clearly more interested in being an
OBSTRUCTIONIST ASSHOLE than engaging in constructive conversation.
Jack did the right thing - ie redirect you to somewhere more
appropriate. Its hardly his fault if you don't like the answer.
PLONK

Your loss, not Jack's.
Generally its considered a bad idea to plonk the regulars, typically
you get less not more help.

--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt>

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[David Resnick]

Mr. Travis wrote:

In article <on********************************@4ax.com>,
ja*******@spamcop.net says...

On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 19:21:57 -0400, Mr. Travis
<mr******@special.nospam> wrote in comp.lang.c:

What's the best inexpensive C compiler for Windows with large file
support (LFS)?

.....
Try news:comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32

Large file support is a compiler (or at least a linker) issue, not an OS
issue. The issue arises regardless of the target platform.

In the time it took you to write that whiny complaint, you could have
composed an answer. You're clearly more interested in being an
OBSTRUCTIONIST ASSHOLE than engaging in constructive conversation.

PLONK

Sadly, an asshole has been detected in comp.lang.c. Yep, it's you.
Responding in such a way to a polite redirection wins no points with
anyone. You were asking for help, Mr. Klein gave useful information.
Judging by your response, that was more than you deserved.

-David

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <11********************@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.c om>,
David Resnick <ln********@gmail.com> wrote:

Mr. Travis wrote:

In article <on********************************@4ax.com>,
ja*******@spamcop.net says...

> On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 19:21:57 -0400, Mr. Travis
> <mr******@special.nospam> wrote in comp.lang.c:
>
> > What's the best inexpensive C compiler for Windows with large file
> > support (LFS)?
> >.... >
> Try news:comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32

Large file support is a compiler (or at least a linker) issue, not an OS
issue. The issue arises regardless of the target platform.

In the time it took you to write that whiny complaint, you could have
composed an answer. You're clearly more interested in being an
OBSTRUCTIONIST ASSHOLE than engaging in constructive conversation.

PLONK

Sadly, an asshole has been detected in comp.lang.c. Yep, it's you.
Responding in such a way to a polite redirection wins no points with
anyone. You were asking for help, Mr. Klein gave useful information.
Judging by your response, that was more than you deserved.

He got exactly what he came for. And all is well with the world.

(You don't, for even a second, think that the original post wasn't obvious
trolling, do you?)

[David Resnick]

> Kenny McCormack wrote:

He got exactly what he came for. And all is well with the world.

(You don't, for even a second, think that the original post wasn't obvious
trolling, do you?)

It is sometimes hard for me to distinguish on first post troll
from clueless and belligerent. "Mr. Travis" has no history, so it
is difficult to be sure what is up with him.

-David

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <11**********************@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups .com>,
David Resnick <ln********@gmail.com> wrote:

Kenny McCormack wrote:

He got exactly what he came for. And all is well with the world.

(You don't, for even a second, think that the original post wasn't obvious
trolling, do you?)

It is sometimes hard for me to distinguish on first post troll
from clueless and belligerent. "Mr. Travis" has no history, so it
is difficult to be sure what is up with him.

I think by this point, we should assume that the honchos at trollsRUs know
what it takes (that is, how easy it is) to jerk people's chains in clc.

Following the standard and good advice that most of us learned at our
mother's knees, I think we'd do a lot better to just ignore the troll posts
than to play along with them.

(And, in case this isn't clear, to assume that this c**p is trolling not
cluelessness, unless/until shown otherwise)