Codewarrior



  • THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED

    On 29/11/2002 at 02:17, xxxxxxxx wrote:

    User Information:
    Cinema 4D Version:   8.012 
    Platform:   Windows  ;   
    Language(s) :   C.O.F.F.E.E  ;  C++  ;

    ---------
    I know that you only officially support MS Visual C++ 6.0 for PC, but in the interests of ease of developing both PC and Mac versions of C++ plugins I am considering buying Codewarrior 8 Pro for Win, to allow me to build Win, MacOS and OSX versions all from the same project on the same machine.

    Could anyone tell me if they are aware of any problems (or even better, success stories) with this approach?

    If this works, it means I can support all targets with a single development machine, compiler, and codebase which sounds worth having to me.

    I basically want to know whether to expect a few minor glitches, or whether it just fundamentally won't work for some reason.



  • THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED

    On 29/11/2002 at 07:40, xxxxxxxx wrote:

    Hi,
    well I know that under XL7 Motion Gimmick has worked with CodeWarrior 7 Pro to compile for MAC and PC, but there seem to be problems now with R8, so I am not 100% sure. But it should work.



  • THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED

    On 29/11/2002 at 13:17, xxxxxxxx wrote:

    There are no problems (that I know of) with using CW8 on Windows, the only issue you have to deal with is making a Windows project file, you should be able to use the Mac one as a start, I did under CW7 for XL7. The only issues with CW7 are that the projects are designed for CW8, so using CW8 is advised for ease. The only other reason that VC is preferred is that it produces much better (faster) code (or did under CW7 and lower, not idea about 8).



  • THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED

    On 30/11/2002 at 15:11, xxxxxxxx wrote:

    Ok, thanks guys - I think I'll give it a go.


Log in to reply