stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Farid Zaripov" <>
Subject RE: [PATCH] Scripts, generating solution and projects for MSVC/ICC
Date Fri, 20 Oct 2006 12:01:16 GMT
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Black [] 
> Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 6:56 PM
> To: Farid Zaripov
> Cc: Martin Sebor
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Scripts, generating solution and 
> projects for MSVC/ICC
> Farid, the patch appears to be mostly correct, as the 
> generated solution  using the msvc-8.0-x64 configuration
> produced an x64 DLL (when built as 15d).
> A question I have is a design question.  Does 
> it make more sense to have separate projects for
> Win32 and x64 products, or should the msvc-8.0 solution 
> include both platforms as possible targets?  To my mind, the 
> later makes more sense.

  To have supporting of the several platforms in one solution we should
make a lot of changes to the build infrastructure:
1. Changes to the directory structure. It's maybe this:
2. Changes to the script files (adding the parameter PLATFORM to get
to the executable files for runall.wsf script; buildlog.htm files for
makelog.wsf script
3. Add PLATFORM parameter to the build_xxx.bat to build library and
tests for
specified platform

  The mine MSVC 8.0 also supports the "Pocket PC 2003 (ARMV4)" and
"Pocket PC 2003 (ARMV4)" platforms and I not sure that the list of
platforms is will not be changed in future. The different platforms may
to specify the different compiler/linker options (CPPFLAGS, LDFLAGS) as
as the different names of the compiler/linker/librarian executable (CXX,
and all of this should be handled within the single .config file. 

  So I prefer to have the different .config files for different
platforms to avoid
complication of the build infrastructure.


View raw message