(no subject)
Aug. 30th, 2005 05:45 pmSeen on a web site distributing a RTSP implementation in source code form:
How to configure and build the code on Windows
To configure the code for Windows, first unpack it on a Unix machine
The justification for this is, apparently, "it's rather hard to imagine anyone doing serious development of networking software without having any access to a Unix machine". I do have access to a unix machine, however that machine happens to be at the university, which is not where I am.
Come on, you unix fanboys need to learn that not everyone uses unix or unix-variants. Would you be happy if I distributed code that compiled on linux, but only if you first unpacked it on a windows box?
no subject
Date: 2005-08-30 04:55 pm (UTC)I fucking hate people who do things like what you described c.c;
no subject
Date: 2005-08-30 06:05 pm (UTC)If it's a puzzle, I find that WinRAR can handle most archiving formats known to man, including most of the UNIX-specific ones. Your mileage may vary, obviously. Failing that, if it still interests you, shoot it my way.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2005-08-31 08:24 pm (UTC)At least to me, Windows has 2 different networking modes.
The first is just like *nix, but worse: it has only a handful of FDs, it doesn't treat files and sockets the same way, etc. All these are the lowercase function names.
But then there are the CamelHump functions, which provide functionality I've never heard in Unix before. Like a function call to accept a connexion, based on the IP. (As opposed to accept(), check IP, and close().) It also provides a nice multi-threaded replacement for select().
But I agree with your frustration. Writing good code means going by standards, and not using platform-specific hacks.
(no subject)
From: