[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: VC++ vs. Cygwin

On Mon, 13 Nov 2000, Paul wrote:
>[...]
>This brings up the question of maintaining the windows port in Mash.  I
>would hate to see Lloyd going through another set of 500+ compile
>warnings.

That's what I'm here for!  :)  Honestly, I don't mind.

I've read up more on Cygwin so I'll comment now...

>[...] The question
>I'd like to bring up is to keep support Makefile.vc or to move to cygwin.
>Currently there are pro and con with both parts, and it's not very clear
>to me which way is the best to go.  Any thoughts?
>
>Here are some pro and cons of each I can think of:
>
>VC:
>+has worked
>-need to maintain another Makefile.vc, which cannot be generated
>	automatically

I think that we could use autoconf/configure to generate a Makefile.vc
from Makefile.in.  OTcl manages to do this.  We might not be able to
make it perfectly seamless for Mash, but I think it would help a lot.

>-different versions: VC5, 6, 6+?

I don't think this is an issue.  We should always use the latest
version of VC++ and say that anyone who wants to compile Mash needs
the latest version too.  Requirements for developers can be stricter
than for users.

>-It's M$, but then again, everyone seem to have access to one, except me

Totally irrelevant of course!  :)  Larry has mucho bucks... maybe he
can mail you a copy of VC++.  :)

My additions:

+ Tcl/Tk/OTcl/TclCL all use VC++ for their Windows versions and all of
them supply a Makefile.vc.

This is a big one for me.  I'd rather not have to worry about problems
moving Tcl/Tk/OTcl/TclCL to Cygwin and then having those problems again
whenever we upgrade one of those pieces.

>*Debugging can use Develop studios, but I have not gotten it to recognize
>	the Makefile and create a workspace.

>Cygwin:
>+Uses the virtually same tools as unix build
>+free (that's why I'm trying it as I have no access to a VC)
>+Uses gdb to debug, with some nice GUI
>-Still fairly beta

This is an issue for me as a code maintainer.  The website says that
the next stable release isn't due until early 2001.

>-Developer has to download cygwin (although the process is probably easier
>	than installing VC)
>*Two different Make modes: Unix and Win32, which is still not clear to me
>	when building Tk.  I'm assuming Win32 is better, as it doesn't need X
>	libs, but who knows?

I was leaning towards Cygwin earlier, but I'm leaning heavily towards
VC++ currently.

I'll take a vote in tomorrow's meeting.  If you have any issues you
want to bring up, please mention them.

Everyone that's on this list is welcome to vote too (Visual C++ or
Cygwin for Windows development?).  Just send email to me sometime
tomorrow.

Lloyd