incubator-lucy-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Karman <>
Subject Re: [Lucy] Target platforms
Date Sun, 29 Nov 2009 02:41:53 GMT
Marvin Humphrey wrote on 11/27/09 1:23 PM:
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 10:21:06AM -0800, Nathan Kurz wrote:
>> More generally, it might be nice to make such goals explicit somewhere.
> Yes, for example as Parrot has done with "Target Platforms" at.
> <>.
>> Optimized for: 64-bit systems using GCC and supporting mmap would
>> probably be my vote.
> +1.


>> Making MSVC a first class citizen would be fine if you think the return is
>> there.
> No, as far as I'm concerned MSVC is a compatibility target. 
> I think it's important for our users to provide wide portability, and that
> means supporting MSVC.  E.g. I want somebody's platform-portable wiki project
> or MVC framework to be able to integrate Lucy without hesitation.
> However, Microsoft needs to work a lot harder to make my life easier as an
> open source C developer if they want first-class status.

FWIW, we make Win32 DLLs and .exe available for each Swish-e release by
cross-compiling with mingw32 on debian-based systems (I do it on ubuntu):

We maintain appropriate macro checks in the source code and separate makefiles
etc. The download-and-use attraction for Windows users is huge, since that's the
expectation that community holds.

I personally have no love for the MSVC stuff, and like Marvin says, M$ needs to
work harder if they want me to write free code. Swish3 (for example) has no
explicit Win32 support and I don't intend to write any, though I'd be happy to
include it if someone contributed it. That said, I'm happy to support Marvin's
desire for MSVC a compatibility target (esp since I haven't had to write any
relevant code! ;) ).

Peter Karman  .  .

View raw message