Revisit regex.h problems w/MS compilers
Richard
LinkGammar into various working versions, some which I could link into
MS Excel or Visual Basic. I didn't have any problems. I hadn't kept up
with the newer versions since the original worked fine for my
purposes, but recently I wanted to take advantage of the expanded
dictionary and other improvements.
I just can't get Link Grammar 2.6.6 to compile. The problem right now
is with regex.h where I get a lot of syntax errors during the compile
phase. Possibly there's a #define missing somewhere. I've spent
several days reading through everything that had to do with regex
problems but so far nothing has helped or maybe I missed something
subtle but important.
The version of regex I have was downloaded from
http://gnuwin32.sourceforge.net/packages/regex.htm. I'm using XP w/all
service packs.
I tried compiling v2.6.6 on my Linux box but that didn't work. I tried
using MS C++ 2005, but no luck. I installed MingW/MSys per all the
documents I could find but again no luck. Ahrrg!
Is there a document or a post that defines exactly what includes,
libraries and compiler settings that will get v2.6.6 to compile using
a MS C++ compiler (any version)? I'm not a C++ programming guru.
Thanks ahead for any help.
Linas Vepstas
I just can't get Link Grammar 2.6.6 to compile. The problem right now
is with regex.h where I get a lot of syntax errors during the compile
phase. Possibly there's a #define missing somewhere. I've spent
several days reading through everything that had to do with regex
problems but so far nothing has helped or maybe I missed something
subtle but important.
Can't help if you don't provide specific info.
The version of regex I have was downloaded from
http://gnuwin32.sourceforge.net/packages/regex.htm. I'm using XP w/all
service packs.
That should work. Perhaps its not in the search path that the compiler is using?
I tried compiling v2.6.6 on my Linux box but that didn't work.
That should work trivially; but if you don't provide details, I can't help.
I tried
using MS C++ 2005, but no luck. I installed MingW/MSys per all the
documents I could find but again no luck. Ahrrg!
Is there a document or a post that defines exactly what includes,
libraries and compiler settings that will get v2.6.6 to compile using
a MS C++ compiler (any version)? I'm not a C++ programming guru.
Thanks ahead for any help.
The core problem seems to be that (almost) no one on this mailing list
who uses windows is a "programming guru". Thus, there are many
complaints from the windows crowd, but no one who actually uses it
knows how to fix anything. I guess this is a cultural thing, or something
about the learning curve, I don't know how else to explain it.
I've been trying very hard to keep the windows version working, based
on fragmentary and incomplete comments but clearly, that's not enough.
Until someone from the group of windows users learns how to program,
the system will stay in disrepair ...
--linas
Simon Stuart
Linas,
"The core problem seems to be that (almost) no one on this mailing list
who
uses windows is a "programming guru". Thus, there are many
complaints from the windows crowd, but no one who actually uses it
knows
how to fix anything. I guess this is a cultural thing, or something
about
the learning curve, I don't know how else to explain it."
I think you're mistaking "programming guru" with "linux programmer". I've been developing software for almost 20 years now, and I consider myself to be fairly knowledgable (at least with Windows development). Even so, because I don't develop Linux software, I don't understand Linux compilers! In fact, I find the lack of "plain English" documentation to be absurd where Linux development in concerned (and that's why I don't bother with it). It is absurd that you have to type several thousand commands, modify masses of other people's source and configuration files based on incompletely or incoherent documentation, only to find that (after following the cryptic and gap-riddled instructions) it doesn't compile ANYWAY.
We Windows programmers distribute releases only when they are confirmed to compile (and if necessary, perform as expected at runtime too). Linux developers seem to distribute releases with loose ends, compile-time errors, missing files, dubious (at best) documentation with essoteric instructions understandable only to Tux himself, then expect that everyone who's ever typed a line of code will just "figure it out for themselves". Alas, the world of computers just doesn't work that way!
I am more than a little annoyed that those whom have actually managed to get LGP to compile in VC++ take the time to say "nevermind, I got it to work now" but can't be bothered to take the time to produce a concise, plain English, COMPLETE step-by-step method of HOW they got it to compile. It shouldn't take 8+ hours of Google searching to try (and fail) to find some simple instruction on how to build it in Windows.... especially when these instructions should be included in the Readme.
" Alternately, Windows users who have access to the "Microsoft Visual C"
product may wish to use the project files in the msvc6 directory, or
alternately, those in the msvc9 directory."
Correct me if I'm wrong but that paragraph SUGGESTS that opening the solution file provided with the source in MSVC++ 9 and pressing "Build" would LOGICALLY result in compiled binaries.... but it doesn't. Given that everyone who tries to do exactly that has sent numerous e-mails saying "I get this error" or "I get that error", you'd think by now someone would have taken the time to actually solve the problem... not just for their own needs, but for the benefit of others too.
Still... maybe I just expect too much from my fellow programmers these days....
Regards,
Simon J Stuart
------Original Mail------
From: "Linas Vepstas" <linasv...@gmail.com>
To: <link-g...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 17:02:58 -0600
Subject: Re: [Link Grammar] Revisit regex.h problems w/MS compilers
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "link-grammar" group.
To post to this group, send email to link-g...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to link-grammar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/link-grammar?hl=en.
____________________________________________________________________________
E-Mail scanned by Kaspersky Antivirus (Up To Date)
Linas Vepstas
Linas,
"The core problem seems to be that (almost) no one on this mailing list
who uses windows is a "programming guru". Thus, there are many
complaints from the windows crowd, but no one who actually uses it
knows how to fix anything. I guess this is a cultural thing, or something
about the learning curve, I don't know how else to explain it."I think you're mistaking "programming guru" with "linux programmer". I've been developing software for almost 20 years now, and I consider myself to be fairly knowledgable (at least with Windows development). Even so, because I don't develop Linux software, I don't understand Linux compilers! In fact, I find the lack of "plain English" documentation to be absurd where Linux development in concerned (and that's why I don't bother with it). It is absurd that you have to type several thousand commands, modify masses of other people's source and configuration files based on incompletely or incoherent documentation, only to find that (after following the cryptic and gap-riddled instructions) it doesn't compile ANYWAY.
Since you are mostly interested in being rude and insulting, be forewarned, I am very
good at infuriating my opponents. However, I don't have patience for this. Basically
you are completely wrong, in every possible way that you can be wrong, and brilliantly
illustrate why us normal people ran away from windows long ago. There are deep
cultural reasons why Windows is hard to use, why Linux is vastly superior, and, with
an attitude like yours, why its likely to stay that way.
Anyway, in the world where I come from, even beginning/mediocre programmers seem to
be able to fix the things that you windows users seem not to be able to accomplish,
and they know how to communicate the fixes in such a way that they could be integrated
into the main distribution, so that they get fixed once and for all, for everybody. I thought
I was being kind by calling this a cultural difference, but maybe its an IQ difference.
I can't help more than this.
Richard
I did have regex.h in my include path. After tracing back through the
include header files I found one problem. The file regex.h has the
following definition:
/* Number of subexpressions found by the compiler. */
size_t re_nsub;
It appears that "size_t" should be defined in sys/types.h. It is not
defined in either my VC++ v6 or VC++ 2005 installations. From it's
usage I'm assuming it should be an "unsigned int". I'll have to search
around the Internet to see if there is an "official" windows version
of "sys/types.h" that has the proper definitions and works with the
rest of my programs. I hate to create and maintain a custom system
header.
Unfortunately, this is not the end of my problems getting LG v2.6.6 to
compile. I'll not post a bunch of error messages for now until I can
regroup, check all my compiler settings and compare the various make
files. I guess the original Link Grammar was too easy work with.
On Mar 26, 6:02 pm, Linas Vepstas <linasveps...@gmail.com> wrote:
Simon Stuart
"Since you are mostly interested in being rude and insulting, be forewarned, I am very good at infuriating my opponents. However, I don't have patience for this. Basically you are completely wrong, in every possible way that you can be wrong, and brilliantly illustrate why us normal people ran away from windows long ago. There are deep cultural reasons why Windows is hard to use, why Linux is vastly superior, and, with an attitude like yours, why its likely to stay that way."
I think you've misinterpreted the tone of what I was saying completely! I'm simply explaining that the differences between Windows and Linux development are so significant that for a Windows developer to try and learn Linux-based compilers is an uphill struggle, especially since the "instructions" are like jibberish to us.
In fact, since you're so fervently "anti-Windows" I'd be willing to hazzard a guess that the same is true "vice-versa" as well!
"Anyway, in the world where I come from, even beginning/mediocre programmers seem to be able to fix the things that you windows users seem not to be able to accomplish, and they know how to communicate the fixes in such a way that they could be integrated into the main distribution, so that they get fixed once and for all, for everybody. I thought I was being kind by calling this a cultural difference, but maybe its an IQ difference. I can't help more than this."
Not that I wish to annoy you even more than my last e-mail seemed to, but in the world I come from, we don't use Integers in place of Booleans (to point out one of the many impractical coding choices one notices when perusing the LGP source). And if Linux developers were so good at integrating fixes into the main distribution then there wouldn't be any discussion of compile issues, would there? You can call me sarcastic if you like, but you'd have to be dellusional to not see that I have a point.
All I've said is that the "documentation" is lacking, and that those whom have managed to build the LGP under Windows haven't exactly been forthcoming with a "no-nonensense" doucment detailing HOW they got it to compile. Both points are correct and accurate.... though I'm sure you'll disagree so I won't waste any more of my valuable time with this.
Borislav Iordanov
> All I've said is that the "documentation" is lacking, and that those whom
> have managed to build the LGP under Windows haven't exactly been forthcoming
> with a "no-nonensense" doucment detailing HOW they got it to compile. Both
> points are correct and accurate.... though I'm sure you'll disagree so I
> won't waste any more of my valuable time with this.
The reason the MSVC project files from SVN don't work for you is that
they haven't been maintained. When I created them, they worked. Since
then, the parser has evolved and started using regex and some other
dependencies. Since I haven't had the need to build a new version, and
I've mostly been using Linux lately, I haven't updated project files
or documents. About a month or two ago, somebody on this list had to
compile under windows and resolve all the new problems. I helped as
much as I could, on email and chat and the person managed to compile
and promised to compile and post instructions, but never did.
Linas is very diligent in maintaining a good build environment,
including documentation and he is very responsive to Windows users
also, helping whenever he can. But I guess he ended up being
(rightfully) annoyed by the constant Windows related emails and
complaints and the fact not one of us did provide a compatibilbity
patch+instructions that could be officially committed to svn.
Boris
Richard
I hadn't used the gcc and related compilers for a while so the first
thing I did was reinstall them. This didn't help except it gave me
piece of mind that everything was current.
The errors listed in the config.log were something like: "...linux/
Limits.h: No such file or directory."
I went to /usr/include and made the following link: ln -s /usr/src/
linux/include/linux -- This allowed configure to at least generate the
makefile.
After getting similar errors for asm-generic? during the make process
I added the following link to /usr/include: ln -s /usr/src/linux/
include/asm-generic
Link Grammar v2.6.6 compiled and now runs as advertised on my Linux
box, but I still need it to work under Windows XP or 7.
I'm using PCLinuxOS but I'm assuming others may have similar problems
on other distros.
Later.
On Mar 26, 6:02 pm, Linas Vepstas <linasveps...@gmail.com> wrote:
Borislav Iordanov
Strangely, in MSVC 2008, there's no problem with size_t, but only when
you turn on the "Detect 64-bit incompatibility issues"... so it's
probably conditionally defined somewhere based on that.
Boris
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "link-grammar" group.
> To post to this group, send email to link-g...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to link-grammar...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/link-grammar?hl=en.
>
>
--
http://www.kobrix.com - HGDB graph database, Java Scripting IDE, NLP
http://kobrix.blogspot.com - news and rants
"Frozen brains tell no tales."
-- Buckethead