Re: VC++ vs. Cygwin

• To: Lloyd Lim <lim@bmrc.berkeley.edu>
• Subject: Re: VC++ vs. Cygwin
• From: Denis DeLaRoca <delaroca@ucla.edu>
• Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 09:13:07 -0800 (PST)
• cc: Open Mash Developers <openmash-developers@openmash.org>
• In-Reply-To: <00111617441100.17085@shmoo.cs.berkeley.edu>

On Thu, 16 Nov 2000, Lloyd Lim wrote:

> 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.

Humm? Cygwin sounds too good to be true, but I am afraid that some of the
implementation kludges it uses to "emulate a unix environment" wouldn't at
some point impact the mash code... or perhaps not. To move forward
quickly, I'd vote for VC++ now -- the latest version. And if Cygwin could
be shown to be a superior solution later, then certainly support that as a
viable [alternate] development environment.

-- Denis

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: VC++ vs. Cygwin
    • From: Lloyd Lim <lim@bmrc.berkeley.edu>

• References:
  • Re: VC++ vs. Cygwin
    • From: Lloyd Lim <lim@bmrc.berkeley.edu>

• Prev by Date: Re: Cygwin
• Next by Date: reminder... mtg today
• Prev by thread: Re: VC++ vs. Cygwin
• Next by thread: Re: VC++ vs. Cygwin
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread