harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tanuj Mathur <tanujmat...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Compilers and configuration tools
Date Mon, 24 Oct 2005 09:44:32 GMT
Hi,
  I'd like to help out with supporting the MSVC compiler on Windows.
I'm tied up with work this week, but can take a look at the task from
next Monday.
  Geir, regarding your concerns about MSVC's commercial nature being a
barrier to entry, I am sure that wouldn't be a problem, as the MSVC
optimizing compiler is available as a free download from Microsoft's
website:
        http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=272be09d-40bb-49fd-9cb0-4bfa122fa91b&displaylang=en
  It is only the actual IDE that is commercial, with the Express
Editions estimated to cost $49 per copy (although the betas are free,
as Devanum pointed out).
  It would probably be wise to focus most of the group's initial
efforts on maintaining GCC support, while a few interested people can
work on maintaining  support for other compilers. I believe that the
feedback from the work done on adding compiler compatibility would be
of easier to incorporate if we start early,with the smaller/younger
code base, instead of waiting till later.

- tanuj


On 10/22/05, Apache Harmony Bootstrap JVM <bootjvm@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> I'm with Geir on his comments, but evaluating MSVC
> I think is a good idea because there are so many
> folks who use it-- or is it?  Rodrigo' comments about
> confusion with multiple compiler support make a
> compelling argument about going with _one_
> compiler-- and look at the minor diffs we have
> already experienced!  Rodrigo needs '__int64' on
> hit Linux box, and Robin is arguing with finding
> the correct 'thread.h' (apparently), and I had no
> problems.  All of us are using GCC.  What does
> this tell us?  The less we deal with mechanical
> issues like compiler invocations, the more real
> work we get done.
>
> Bottom line:  Should we just declare one compiler
> for now and branch out later, once we have all of
> our porting done?
>
> Next observation:  There has been an offer of help
> with 'autotools' and some concern about that tool.
> I've seen GNU autoconf work (part of autotools?)
> nicely, and I'm interested in exploring this avenue
> further.
>
> Dan Lydick
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Davanum Srinivas <davanum@gmail.com>
> Sent: Oct 21, 2005 10:31 AM
> To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Small problems building under cygwin
>
> I believe Express versions are available for download -
> http://lab.msdn.microsoft.com/express/visualc/default.aspx
>
> -- dims
>
> On 10/21/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geirm@apache.org> wrote:
> > I'd like to be sure that we don't have a barrier to entry by having
> > to go get commercial software to  build the project - by this I mean
> > a MSVC requirement.  I'm happy if windows users can use MSVC if they
> > want - i.e. if someone supports it - but it can't be the only option.
> >
> > geir
> >
> ...snip...
>
>
>
>
>
> Dan Lydick
>

Mime
View raw message