.lib

[asit]

I am gooc in C and can handle thread, socket programming.
My compiler has no native support for FTP,HTTP, etc.

So I am dependent upon curl and ftplib for FTP implementation in my
application.
I am ignorant about external library and also make file.(becoz in
addtion to .c,.cpp,.h there is also a file called .lib file)

what should be my next step ???

[Richard Bos]

asit <li*****@gmail.comwrote:

I am gooc in C

This has proved to be debatable.

what should be my next step ???

Find a newsgroup which handles your compiler specifically, not one which
handles Standard C. If you're as good at C as you think, your problems
are not with C, but with using your compiler suite.

Richard

[asit]

On Oct 9, 3:38 pm, [e-mail] (Richard Bos) wrote:

asit <[e-mail]:

I am gooc in C

This has proved to be debatable.

what should be my next step ???

Find a newsgroup which handles your compiler specifically, not one which
handles Standard C. If you're as good at C as you think, your problems
are not with C, but with using your compiler suite.

Richard

If some one gives me a link, I will be grateful....

[Richard Bos]

asit <li*****@gmail.comwrote:

On Oct 9, 3:38 pm, [e-mail] (Richard Bos) wrote:

Find a newsgroup which handles your compiler specifically, not one which
handles Standard C. If you're as good at C as you think, your problems
are not with C, but with using your compiler suite.

If some one gives me a link, I will be grateful....

*sigh* As has already been explained several times, it depends on
_which_ compiler you use.

Richard

[Eric Sosman]

asit wrote:

I am gooc in C

No, thanks, I con't want your bricge.

and can handle thread, socket programming.

... anc dannot comprehenc, even after many people have
explainec it to you darefully, why disdussions of these
topids belong elsewhere. Gooc in C, stupic in Usenet.

what should be my next step ???

Cry up anc blow away. Gooc-bye.

--
Eric Sosman
es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalid

[Antoninus Twink]

On 9 Oct 2008 at 10:20, asit wrote:

So I am dependent upon curl and ftplib for FTP implementation in my
application.
I am ignorant about external library and also make file.(becoz in
addtion to .c,.cpp,.h there is also a file called .lib file)

Are you sure? There might be a lib/ directory.

On *nix, static libraries are typically called *.a and shared libraries
are typically called *.so. On Windows, shared libraries are called
*.dll, and I don't believe that static libraries exist.

So once you have installed a library - for example, let's say you've
installed libcurl.so in /usr/local/lib - then you need to tell your
linker that your program depends on this library (e.g. by passing -lcurl
as a command-line argument, or by using a "linker options" menu item in
an IDE), and where to find it (e.g. by passing -L/usr/local/lib as an
argument, or naming the directory in the IDE).

As I said before, if you want specific instructions you should state
which operating system, IDE (if applicable) and compiler you're using.

[Flash Gordon]

Antoninus Twink wrote, On 09/10/08 20:59:

On 9 Oct 2008 at 10:20, asit wrote:

>So I am dependent upon curl and ftplib for FTP implementation in my
application.
I am ignorant about external library and also make file.(becoz in
addtion to .c,.cpp,.h there is also a file called .lib file)

Are you sure? There might be a lib/ directory.

On *nix, static libraries are typically called *.a and shared libraries
are typically called *.so.

Apart from on big-name Unix implementations where they typicalally are not.

On Windows, shared libraries are called
*.dll, and I don't believe that static libraries exist.

OK, so we've established something else you don't know about. I really
don't know why you keep posting about things you obviously don't know.

So once you have installed a library - for example, let's say you've
installed libcurl.so in /usr/local/lib - then you need to tell your

<snip poor advice>

There are *far* better and more robust ways to use a lot of libraries
the details of which are off topic. They start by reading the
documentation for the library, which in the case of curl *definitely*
tells you how to do it (well, they told me how to do it in a far more
robust manner).

As I said before, if you want specific instructions you should state
which operating system, IDE (if applicable) and compiler you're using.

Actually, as usual when you ask people to post more, the OP should ask
implementation specific questions in an implementation specific group or
mailing list. People on the curl mailing lists will be able to explain
anything about how to use curl the OP does not understand and people on
the implementation specific groups will be able to tell the OP how to
use the tools of that implementation.
--
Flash Gordon
If spamming me sent it to sm**@spam.causeway.com
If emailing me use my reply-to address
See the comp.lang.c Wiki hosted by me at http://clc-wiki.net/

[Antoninus Twink]

On 9 Oct 2008 at 20:56, Flash Gordon wrote:

Antoninus Twink wrote, On 09/10/08 20:59:

>On Windows, shared libraries are called *.dll, and I don't believe
that static libraries exist.

OK, so we've established something else you don't know about. I really
don't know why you keep posting about things you obviously don't know.

It's clear from the words I used that I wasn't claiming to know for sure
that static libraries don't exist on Windows. Really my statement was an
invitation for a Windows expert to enlighten me, and inform other
readers at the same time.

It's a shame that instead of passing on your knowledge, you instead
chose to throw mud.

There are *far* better and more robust ways to use a lot of libraries
the details of which are off topic. They start by reading the
documentation for the library, which in the case of curl *definitely*
tells you how to do it (well, they told me how to do it in a far more
robust manner).

Personally, I use the autotools for substantial projects, and
hand-crafted makefiles for little toy programs. I find both of those
"robust" enough for my needs, whatever on earth "robust" means in this
context.

The OP seems to be using Windows, and so is likely to be trying to do
things using IDEs, menus and the like. As he hasn't told us exactly what
platform he's using, I don't see how anyone could possibly provide
better help than generic advice to look for a "linker options" menu item
or something similar.

[Ian Collins]

Antoninus Twink wrote:

On 9 Oct 2008 at 20:56, Flash Gordon wrote:

>Antoninus Twink wrote, On 09/10/08 20:59:

>>On Windows, shared libraries are called *.dll, and I don't believe
that static libraries exist.

OK, so we've established something else you don't know about. I really
don't know why you keep posting about things you obviously don't know.

It's clear from the words I used that I wasn't claiming to know for sure
that static libraries don't exist on Windows. Really my statement was an
invitation for a Windows expert to enlighten me, and inform other
readers at the same time.

Then do what the more intelligent accidental posters here do when
redirected and ask on a windows group.

I know you troll here just to piss of the regulars, but providing
misleading or bad advice to the innocent is just plain nasty.

--
Ian Collins.

[Antoninus Twink]

On 9 Oct 2008 at 21:40, Ian Collins wrote:

I know you troll here just to piss of the regulars,

Nonsense. I post here because I think it's important to contribute to a
frank forum where all C questions can be discussed. I couldn't care less
what those of the "regulars" with nothing useful to say and no
willingness to help people think or do, and as I understand it most of
them have "killfiled" me anyway.

but providing misleading or bad advice to the innocent is just plain
nasty.

I made it very clear that I wasn't sure that what I said was right, and
only a fool would have interpreted my words as gospel.

Anyway, this issue of static libraries on Windows seems to be an
interesting one.

<quote from Wikipedia>
Depending on how they are compiled, *.LIB files can be either static
libraries or representations of dynamically linkable libraries needed
only during compilation, known as "Import Libraries". Unlike in the UNIX
world, where different file extensions are used, when linking against
..LIB file in Windows one must first know if it is a regular static
library or an import library.
</quote>

That sounds very odd to me - what exactly is a "representation of a
dynamically linkable library needed only during compilation"? Why is it
useful?

[Richard]

Antoninus Twink <no****@nospam.invalidwrites:

On 9 Oct 2008 at 21:40, Ian Collins wrote:

>I know you troll here just to piss of the regulars,

Nonsense. I post here because I think it's important to contribute to a
frank forum where all C questions can be discussed. I couldn't care less
what those of the "regulars" with nothing useful to say and no
willingness to help people think or do, and as I understand it most of
them have "killfiled" me anyway.

The petty minded fools who try to over regulate this group remind me of
civil servants in various countries. Rather than stamp the form there and
then and save a lot of trouble, time and money they send you off to
repeat yourself over and over again to another department. It's the
ministry of "not my problem" in comp.lang.c.

[Flash Gordon]

Antoninus Twink wrote, On 09/10/08 23:14:

<snip>

Anyway, this issue of static libraries on Windows seems to be an
interesting one.

It's not interesting.

<quote from Wikipedia>
Depending on how they are compiled, *.LIB files can be either static
libraries or representations of dynamically linkable libraries needed
only during compilation, known as "Import Libraries".

It's not accurate. At best it is a subset of the options used.

Unlike in the UNIX
world, where different file extensions are used,

It's far from accurate.

when linking against
.LIB file in Windows one must first know if it is a regular static
library or an import library.
</quote>

That sounds very odd to me - what exactly is a "representation of a
dynamically linkable library needed only during compilation"? Why is it
useful?

Ask in a Windows group and people might give you the entire horrible
story. It's nothing to do with C and everything to do with Windows.
--
Flash Gordon
If spamming me sent it to sm**@spam.causeway.com
If emailing me use my reply-to address
See the comp.lang.c Wiki hosted by me at http://clc-wiki.net/

[Nick Keighley]

On 10 Oct, 00:51, Richard<[e-mail]:

The petty minded fools who try to over regulate this group remind me of
civil servants in various countries. Rather than stamp the form there and
then and save a lot of trouble, time and money they send you off to
repeat yourself over and over again to another department. It's the
ministry of "not my problem" in comp.lang.c.

ah! This is an excellent analogy. One of my friends works for
the Inland Revenue (IRS) (I'm just not picky am I?). During the
BSE (Mad Cow) crisis[1] his site was very busy. Vets (Vetinarians),
scientists, soldiers all sorts. Now if someone had walked into
his office and asked him the correct procedure for disposing of
the body of an infected BSE cow[2] should he:

(a) guess based on a conversation he'd had with a vet by the
coffee machine

or (b) point out this his site was shared between the Ministry of
Agriculture and The Inland Revenue. And though he would like to help
he was not, in fact, trained in vetinary medicine or in slaughtering
procedures.
[1] cattle in Britain were infected by a disease that caused their
brains
to rot away.

[2] my fiend does exist and his work site was busy during the BSE
"event".
But no one asked him how to get rid of a dead cow.
--
Nick Keighley

[Smurff]

On Oct 10, 12:51*am, Richard<[e-mail]:

Antoninus Twink <[e-mail]:

On *9 Oct 2008 at 21:40, Ian Collins wrote:

I know you troll here just to piss of the regulars,

Nonsense. I post here because I think it's important to contribute to a
frank forum where all C questions can be discussed. I couldn't care less
what those of the "regulars" with nothing useful to say and no
willingness to help people think or do, and as I understand it most of
them have "killfiled" me anyway.

The petty minded fools who try to over regulate this group remind me of
civil servants in various countries. Rather than stamp the form there and
then and save a lot of trouble, time and money they send you off to
repeat yourself over and over again to another department. It's the
ministry of "not my problem" in comp.lang.c.

I couldnt agree more. The time it took to write "your sh*t and know
nothing" they could have helped. Its a typical arrogance of people who
should get out more.

E.g. "Cry up anc blow away. Gooc-bye." Give the man a few links for
god sake.

[Eric Sosman]

Smurff wrote:

[...]
E.g. "Cry up anc blow away. Gooc-bye." Give the man a few links for
god sake.

He's been given dozens of links, if not hundreds. I've
answered some of his questions, and I've provided him some
of the links to sources of better answers.

But does he follow them? Well, yes, sort of: I've seen
some of his questions pop up in other newsgroups, a day or
two after he posts them here. But after having located a
forum for questions about networking or threading or graphics
or recipes for computer-controlled bread makers, does he use
that forum for his next question about them? No, he's back
to good old comp.lang.c, which he seems to regard as the
gateway to Usenet, the index to all knowledge.

He is either too contrary or too stupid to reform, and
I for one have ceased to care which it is.

--
Eric Sosman
es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalid

[Richard Heathfield]

Smurff said:

On Oct 10, 12:51 am, Richard<[e-mail]:

>Antoninus Twink <[e-mail]:

On 9 Oct 2008 at 21:40, Ian Collins wrote:
I know you troll here just to piss of the regulars,

Nonsense. I post here because I think it's important to contribute to
a frank forum where all C questions can be discussed. I couldn't care
less what those of the "regulars" with nothing useful to say and no
willingness to help people think or do, and as I understand it most of
them have "killfiled" me anyway.

The petty minded fools who try to over regulate this group remind me of
civil servants in various countries. Rather than stamp the form there
and then and save a lot of trouble, time and money they send you off to
repeat yourself over and over again to another department. It's the
ministry of "not my problem" in comp.lang.c.

I couldnt agree more.

It would be wiser to agree less.

The complete store of human knowledge is vast. Like any repository, it is
easier to use if its contents are ordered in some way. You use the
ordering to find the right place to get the information you need.

If you have a question about bicycle racing, where would it make most sense
to ask? comp.lang.c, or rec.bicycles.racing?

If you have a question about Spanish, where would it make most sense to
ask? comp.lang.c, or alt.language.spanish?

If you have a question about DSPs, where would it make most sense to ask?
comp.lang.c, or comp.arch.embedded?

If you have a question about Unix programming, where would it make most
sense to ask? comp.lang.c, or comp.unix.programmer?

If you have a question about Perl, where would it make most sense to ask?
comp.lang.c, or comp.lang.perl.misc?

If you have a question about Windows programming (such as the OP's
question), where would it make most sense to ask? comp.lang.c, or
comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32?

The time it took to write "your sh*t and know
nothing"

I believe you've made a mistake. If you disagree, please produce the
Message-ID that backs up your claim.

they could have helped. Its a typical arrogance of people who
should get out more.

Those who redirected the OP (to a group where experts on Windows libraries
can be found) *were* helping. To assume that comp.lang.c has the best
answers on any programming-related subject whatsoever is itself an
offensively arrogant assumption. It is reasonable to suppose that, for
questions to do with programming in C, comp.lang.c has the best answers
available on Usenet, but for any other subjects, the best answers are to
be found in groups dedicated to discussions of those subjects.

E.g. "Cry up anc blow away. Gooc-bye." Give the man a few links for
god sake.

Please, just spend a few minutes thinking about this, instead of shooting
from the hip.

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999

[s0suk3]

On Oct 10, 8:02*am, Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrote:
<snip>

If you have a question about Unix programming, where would it make most
sense to ask? comp.lang.c, or comp.unix.programmer?

UNIX is closely related to C (C was developed for and in that
environment), so if it has to do with both UNIX and C, I believe it to
be useful and harmless to discuss it in both comp.lang.c and
comp.unix.programmer.

If you have a question about Perl, where would it make most sense to ask?
comp.lang.c, or comp.lang.perl.misc?

Perl is closely related to C (Perl is written in C), so if it has to
do with an aspect of Perl relevant to C, I believe it to be useful and
harmless to discuss it in both comp.lang.c and comp.lang.perl.misc.

If you have a question about Windows programming (such as the OP's
question), where would it make most sense to ask? comp.lang.c, or
comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32?

Windows is closely related to C (a large part of Windows is written in
C), so if it has to do with an aspect of Windows relating to C, I
believe it to be useful and harmless to discuss it in both comp.lang.c
and comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32.

The thing is that those topics have their own specialized newsgroups,
so yes, it's probably best to discuss them there. However I see no
reason not to talk about them here, too (since they do relate to C),
and I see no need to tell someone asking about it to "Cry up anc blow
away. Gooc-bye."

Sebastian

[Chris Dollin]

s0****@gmail.com wrote:

On Oct 10, 8:02*am, Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrote:
<snip>

>If you have a question about Unix programming, where would it make most
sense to ask? comp.lang.c, or comp.unix.programmer?

UNIX is closely related to C (C was developed for and in that
environment),

That's not a close enough relationship to make UNIX discussions
topical in C, just as sheep-raising isn't generally topical in
a knitting forum.

>If you have a question about Perl, where would it make most sense to ask?
comp.lang.c, or comp.lang.perl.misc?

Perl is closely related to C (Perl is written in C),

That's not a close relationship, that's an accidental relationship.
There are many languages with implementations in C -- I have, for
example, an implementation of my language Spice written in C;
but that doesn't make Spice topical here, which is just as well,
since what it has in common with C [1] is common to many many languages,
and what it doesn't have in common [2] is the greater part.

Windows is closely related to C (a large part of Windows is written in
C),

Ditto.

[1] statements, procedures, variables, expressions, sequences ...

[2] dynamic types, optional static typing, automatic store management,
multi-methods, multiple values (for expressions, statements, argument
lists, return values), full lexical scoping, lambda-expressions,
classes, packages, no goto, no break, no continue, no return, but
a baroque for-loop.

--
'It changed the future .. and it changed us.' /Babylon 5/

Hewlett-Packard Limited registered no:
registered office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN 690597 England

[Richard Heathfield]

s0****@gmail.com said:

On Oct 10, 8:02 am, Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrote:

<snip>

>

>If you have a question about Perl, where would it make most sense to
ask? comp.lang.c, or comp.lang.perl.misc?

Perl is closely related to C (Perl is written in C),

So what? Fleetwood Mac CDs are made out of atoms, but that isn't sufficient
to make Fleetwood Mac CDs topical in sci.physics.particle.

<snip>

and I see no need to tell someone asking about it to "Cry up anc blow
away. Gooc-bye."

There, at least, I can agree with you.

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999

[vippstar]

On Oct 10, 5:11 pm, [e-mail] wrote:

On Oct 10, 8:02 am, Richard Heathfield <[e-mail]:
<snip>

If you have a question about Unix programming, where would it make most
sense to ask? comp.lang.c, or comp.unix.programmer?

UNIX is closely related to C (C was developed for and in that
environment), so if it has to do with both UNIX and C, I believe it to
be useful and harmless to discuss it in both comp.lang.c and
comp.unix.programmer.

If you have a question about Perl, where would it make most sense to ask?
comp.lang.c, or comp.lang.perl.misc?

Perl is closely related to C (Perl is written in C), so if it has to
do with an aspect of Perl relevant to C, I believe it to be useful and
harmless to discuss it in both comp.lang.c and comp.lang.perl.misc.

If you have a question about Windows programming (such as the OP's
question), where would it make most sense to ask? comp.lang.c, or
comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32?

Windows is closely related to C (a large part of Windows is written in
C), so if it has to do with an aspect of Windows relating to C, I
believe it to be useful and harmless to discuss it in both comp.lang.c
and comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32.

Well, I have written an implementation for every single programming
language out there, in C.
That makes every programming language topical here in comp.lang.c
I believe it to be useful and harmless to discuss it in both
comp.lang.c and their dedicated group.

Also, since C is turing complete, every and any algorithm is topical
here in comp.lang.c
I believe it to be useful and harmless to discuss all algorithms in
both comp.lang.c and their dedicated group.

ISO is closely related to C; (A large part of C is actually written by
ISO), so yeah, all published standards by ISO are topical here.

A friend of a friend is a friend, so comp.lang.c is pretty much a
forum for everything and anything.
No harm in that. Useful, I believe.