socket programming in C

[ballpointpenthief]

Is this group the correct place to ask this question?

Since no-one has answered me as yet I will post it here anyway.
= = = = == = ==== = = =====

I'm trying to program sockets in C, very trivial usage.

Using lcc-win32:
I get some compilation error about #include being to deeply nested.

Using dev-c++:
I get linker errors for some commands.

I suspect that my lack of knowledge as to what header files and what to
put in the linker is the cause of my grief.
The code is straightforward. {socket(), connect(), and suchlike} &
{socket(), bind(), listen(), accept() and suchlike} that I found on two
tutorials.

Where to go? I've wasted quite a lot of time.

Thanks, Matt

[jacob navia]

ballpointpenthief a écrit :

Is this group the correct place to ask this question?

Since no-one has answered me as yet I will post it here anyway.
= = = = == = ==== = = =====

I'm trying to program sockets in C, very trivial usage.

Using lcc-win32:
I get some compilation error about #include being to deeply nested.

Using dev-c++:
I get linker errors for some commands.

I suspect that my lack of knowledge as to what header files and what to
put in the linker is the cause of my grief.
The code is straightforward. {socket(), connect(), and suchlike} &
{socket(), bind(), listen(), accept() and suchlike} that I found on two
tutorials.

Where to go? I've wasted quite a lot of time.

Thanks, Matt

Hi

The first thing to do is read the documentation... isn't it?

Download from the lcc-win32 site:
http://www.q-software-solutions.de/pub/tutorial.pdf
and read the Network Programming part, beginning with
section 4.7: Client/Server programming using sockets.

When you understand that, you can go further. Since lcc-win32
is not on topic here (this group is about the C language)
pose any further questions in the newsgroup
comp.compilers.lcc

jacob

[Keith Thompson]

"ballpointpenthief" <Ma*************@gmail.com> writes:

Is this group the correct place to ask this question?
No.
Since no-one has answered me as yet I will post it here anyway.
= = = = == = ==== = = =====

I'm trying to program sockets in C, very trivial usage.

Using lcc-win32:
I get some compilation error about #include being to deeply nested.

Using dev-c++:
I get linker errors for some commands.

Standard C has no support for sockets; they're supported (if at all)
through add-on libraries. Since both implementations you mention are
Windows-specific (I know lcc-win32 is; I *think* dev-c++ is), you
might try comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32. Or, as jacob
mentioned, there's a comp.compilers.lcc group where general questions
about using lcc-win32 seem to be considered topical.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.

[Chuck F.]

ballpointpenthief wrote:

Is this group the correct place to ask this question?

Since no-one has answered me as yet I will post it here anyway.
= = = = == = ==== = = =====

I'm trying to program sockets in C, very trivial usage.

Using lcc-win32:
I get some compilation error about #include being to deeply nested.

Using dev-c++:
I get linker errors for some commands.

If you had posted it here you would have been told it was
off-topic. At any rate, try a group that deals with your system,
or comp.compilers.lcc (for the lcc operation)

--
"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
More details at: <http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/>

[Chuck F.]

jacob navia wrote:

ballpointpenthief a écrit :

Is this group the correct place to ask this question?

Since no-one has answered me as yet I will post it here
anyway. = = = = == = ==== = = =====

.... snip ...
The first thing to do is read the documentation... isn't it?

Download from the lcc-win32 site:
http://www.q-software-solutions.de/pub/tutorial.pdf and read the
Network Programming part, beginning with section 4.7:
Client/Server programming using sockets.

When you understand that, you can go further. Since lcc-win32 is
not on topic here (this group is about the C language) pose any
further questions in the newsgroup comp.compilers.lcc

Well done Jacob. This should bring no topicality complaints.

--
"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
More details at: <http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/>

[Richard Bos]

"Chuck F. " <cb********@yahoo.com> wrote:

jacob navia wrote:

Download from the lcc-win32 site:
http://www.q-software-solutions.de/pub/tutorial.pdf and read the
Network Programming part, beginning with section 4.7:
Client/Server programming using sockets.

When you understand that, you can go further. Since lcc-win32 is
not on topic here (this group is about the C language) pose any
further questions in the newsgroup comp.compilers.lcc

Well done Jacob. This should bring no topicality complaints.

Right. I know I've called Jacob various things in the past, but this,
Jacob, was one I can quite agree with.

Richard

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <43***************@news.xs4all.nl>,
Richard Bos <rl*@hoekstra-uitgeverij.nl> wrote:

"Chuck F. " <cb********@yahoo.com> wrote:

jacob navia wrote:

> Download from the lcc-win32 site:
> http://www.q-software-solutions.de/pub/tutorial.pdf and read the
> Network Programming part, beginning with section 4.7:
> Client/Server programming using sockets.
>
> When you understand that, you can go further. Since lcc-win32 is
> not on topic here (this group is about the C language) pose any
> further questions in the newsgroup comp.compilers.lcc

Well done Jacob. This should bring no topicality complaints.

Right. I know I've called Jacob various things in the past, but this,
Jacob, was one I can quite agree with.

Good doggie, good doggie.

I'll bet he is soooooooo thrilled.