valgrind for WINE
arg at cyberscience.com
Thu Apr 3 07:45:06 CST 2003
At 06:57 03/04/03 -0500, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
>On April 3, 2003 05:45 am, Adam Gundy wrote:
>> I've never got very far with winelib - as soon as any code involving OLE
>> gets involved, things won't compile. In fact, getting stuff without OLE to
>> compile is frequently painful and slow :-(
>I suggest you look into winegcc if you want to use winelib.
>It makes it a lot easier.
I used winemaker to create make/configure files etc - after a couple of days
of hacking the source I managed to get (most of) MFC to build using this. we
need MFC0LE as well - most of that *wouldn't* build...
another couple of days trying to build one of our libraries (of about 40) convinced
me that it wasn't going to be worth the effort.
I see that winemaker didn't use winegcc as the compiler - does it really make that
much difference? I had problems with nameless unions and structures, missing definitions
in the wine headers, several OLE interfaces being missing, (our) OLE interface definition
which defined sub-interfaces (don't know what the real name for these is) refusing to compile.
Most of the issues were either:
a) missing definitions or functionality in the wine(lib) headers - stuff which works under
b) compiler problems where either Microsoft (in MFCxx) or we had used extensions to C++.
Real Programmers don't comment their code. If it was hard to write,
it should be hard to read, and even harder to modify.
These are all my own opinions.
More information about the wine-devel