Re: Quick question about streams...?



Robby <Robby@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Okay, I don't mind learning all there is to learn, but wait a minute...
All the commands that I am doing in Charles Petzold's book (for loops,
structures, malloc, and Create file.... isn't that all "C" language)

No. For loops and structures are the C language. malloc is part of the C
run-time library, available on every operating system that has a C
compiler. CreateFile is a Win32 API. Windows-specific, unrelated to C.

These are important differences. Compilers don't care what functions you
call. A C program can call run-time library functions, or Windows
functions, or Linux functions, or VMS functions. Doesn't matter. It's all
C. When you try to RUN the program, that's when you get into the libraries
and the APIs. But, at that point, it isn't C or C++ any more, it's a
compiled, machine-language binary.

And isn't the API a bunch of C functions?

No. The API is a bunch of functions. They happen to be defined based on
the C calling conventions, but they can be called from any language that
can provide that. Pascal, Visual Basic, C++, Forth, Python, Perl; there
are many languages that can call the Win32 APIs.

I was always confused on this.... For once and for all...............Can I
confirm something.

Our processor right runs binary code... right....

Processors run machine language. Raw bytes of binary that are executed by
the processor.

which in turn they developped assembler on top of binary code right.....

"They"? It's possible that the first x86 assemblers were written in a
higher-level language on some other processor. You'd assemble a program on
that other computer, then copy it over to your x86 for execution.

In which then they invented C which runs on assembler right.....

I don't know what "runs on assembler" means. A C compiler usually starts
out as a little bootstrap program written in assembler; eventually, the
bootstrap gets good enough so that the rest of the compiler can be written
in C. Most C compilers create machine language directly, so that an
assembler isn't involved. (The gcc compiler does create assembly code, and
then calls an assembler to finish the job.)

Then they developped DOS on C right...... or wrong?

Originally, DOS was written in assembler. The x86 C compilers just weren't
good enough at the time.

Whereby they made Windows out of C language right..... coupled with C
functions as the API right or wrong... or am I way off?????

Windows was written in a mixture of C and hand-optimized assembler. Windows
NT and its derivatives are almost entirely in C and C++.

And then how does C++ and VC++ tie into all of this????
And I guess mfc is built to run on the API right....

MFC is a large set of C++ wrappers that makes the API easier to use. Most
MFC functions eventually call Win32 APIs.

And what about atl... what is that?

You will have to learn about C++ for that. ATL is a set of template
classes that make Windows apps and components easier to write. ATL has
less overhead than MFC.

and .net runs on the API also or on C++?

I don't know what you mean by "runs on". The core part of .NET is probably
written in C or C++. Most of its large run-time library is probably
written in C#.

And what's a Frameworks?

A framework is just a large library of procedures and functions to help you
write some kind of application. MFC is a framework. The .NET
common-language runtime is a framework.
--
- Tim Roberts, timr@xxxxxxxxx
Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.
.



Relevant Pages

  • Re: Quick question about streams...?
    ... For loops and structures are the C language. ... The API is a bunch of functions. ... I don't know what "runs on assembler" means. ... A C compiler usually starts ...
    (microsoft.public.vc.language)
  • Re: HLA StdLib2 criticism
    ... HLC.EXE with an already existing C compiler and calls it HLC system. ... Suppose someone creates a new language and calls it "High Level ... Assembler" (HLA). ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: HLA StdLib2 criticism
    ... Assembler" (HLA). ... Can that person call this the "FASM language?" ... but also of course not he can call it an assembler ... Therefore HLC.EXE can't be called a compiler. ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: Why no C++ in Windows itself?
    ... >Do you mean that C is faster executing? ... I wasn't trying to start a language war. ... compiled by a C++ compiler). ... you have to "deobjectify" any data you want to access from assembler ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Why no C++ in Windows itself?
    ... >Do you mean that C is faster executing? ... I wasn't trying to start a language war. ... compiled by a C++ compiler). ... you have to "deobjectify" any data you want to access from assembler ...
    (microsoft.public.vc.language)