You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@harmony.apache.org by Apache Harmony Bootstrap JVM <bo...@earthlink.net> on 2005/10/21 21:23:16 UTC
Compilers and configuration tools
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 <da...@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. <ge...@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
Re: Compilers and configuration tools
Posted by Tanuj Mathur <ta...@gmail.com>.
Hi Francisco,
> That's not correct. GCC is Free Software, VC++ 2003 compiler, although a
> free-of-charge download, is propritary software (you don't have access
> to the source and can't create derivative works under any circumstance).
My comparison of GCC and MSVC was in terms of usage and cost (free
download, commandline - no IDE required) and not in terms of the
license.
> Even more, I believe the license on the VC++ 2003 compiler does not
> allow you to run commercial applications.
This is incorrect. The VC++ 2003 toolkit licence makes no
differentiation between commercial and non-commercial applications.
Both are allowed. You can check out the EULA at
http://msdn.microsoft.com/visualc/vctoolkit2003/eula.aspx.
> Please do not compare the proprietary compiler from Microsoft with GCC
> in terms of 'free availability'. You may not like the GPL license on GCC
> (which I really like), but that another issue.
Please note that I have no issues with the GPL license whatsoever.
- tanuj
Re: Compilers and configuration tools
Posted by karan malhi <ka...@gmail.com>.
I think Tanuj was just comparing the similarities GCC and VC++ in terms
of free download. I didnt see him mention anywhere that he doesnt like
the GPL license on GCC :)
Francisco Andrades Grassi wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> Tanuj Mathur wrote:
>
>> Hey,
>>
>>>> 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).
>>>
>>> Right - but still - we can't force people to go buy Express.
>>>
>>
>> Just to clear up any confusion, the VC++ 2003 command line compiler
>> and the required utilities and libraries are available as a free
>> download, exactly like GCC.
>
>
> That's not correct. GCC is Free Software, VC++ 2003 compiler, although
> a free-of-charge download, is propritary software (you don't have
> access to the source and can't create derivative works under any
> circumstance). Even more, I believe the license on the VC++ 2003
> compiler does not allow you to run commercial applications.
>
> Please do not compare the proprietary compiler from Microsoft with GCC
> in terms of 'free availability'. You may not like the GPL license on
> GCC (which I really like), but that another issue.
>
--
Karan Singh
Re: Compilers and configuration tools
Posted by Mark Wielaard <ma...@klomp.org>.
Hi Rivaaj,
On Tue, 2005-10-25 at 17:07 +0200, Rivaaj Jumna wrote:
> This may be a bit off topic but what does a harmony developers desktop look
> like? My reason for asking is that I've been groomed on developing using an
> ide in the windows environemnt, Visual Studio 6.0 and the like.
>
> What sort of tools would one use on a Linux environment, eclipse cdt
> perhaps? I'm not afraid of command lines, :-) but they're a barrier to entry
> for someone like myself who would just like to explore the code base.
To be honest most of us GNU/Linux hackers just use GNU Emacs as the true
editor/ide/kitchen sink. But since we are now able to provide support
for large applications like Eclipse some people have started to use that
as "dog food" for hacking on GNU Classpath, Mauve and JamVM.
Tom Tromey wrote a couple of guides of how to do that.
"eclipse, jamvm, and classpath"
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/classpath/2005-09/msg00073.html
"mauve testing with eclipse"
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/classpath/2005-09/msg00074.html
Native eclipse now comes with several GNU/Linux distributions like
Fedora, Ubuntu and Debian (unstable).
Cheers,
Mark
--
Escape the Java Trap with GNU Classpath!
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html
Join the community at http://planet.classpath.org/
Re: Compilers and configuration tools
Posted by ac...@apache.org.
You can use "gdb" which is a line debugger. However as much as I DO
love the command line...even I am a sucker for a visual debugger...
I haven't done as much C programming as I would have liked to over the
last few years. however, if I were abetting man I'd bet on this:
https://libre2.adacore.com/gps/
If you do install visual tools under cygwin, you will also need to
install X-Windows (X-11).
Good places to look for things: freshmeat.net, gnu.org
Do not worry freshmeat.net is not a porn site...unless you consider open
source and/or free software a form of pornography...in which case
remember what Potter Stewart said about the subject and don't let anyone
tell you different :-)
-Andy
> What about debugging tools? What would you suggest to get started with?
>
> On 10/25/05, acoliver@apache.org <ac...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>>Rivaaj Jumna wrote:
>>
>>>Hi
>>>
>>>This may be a bit off topic but what does a harmony developers desktop
>>
>>look
>>
>>>like? My reason for asking is that I've been groomed on developing using
>>
>>an
>>
>>>ide in the windows environemnt, Visual Studio 6.0 and the like.
>>>
>>>What sort of tools would one use on a Linux environment, eclipse cdt
>>>perhaps? I'm not afraid of command lines, :-) but they're a barrier to
>>
>>entry
>>
>>>for someone like myself who would just like to explore the code base.
>>>
>>>Regards
>>>Rivaaj
>>>
>>
>>Grab "cygwin" and install a bash shell for windows, the GCC compiler,
>>automake, make and vi. Do not install emacs because it has a speech
>>impediment.
>>
>>There is a certain bias I have that tends to think that visual
>>programmers do not tend to be able to write compilers and the such. If
>>command lines are a barrier to entry, wait till you meet hexcodes and
>>relocatable memory addressing. However that may just be that I'm a
>>command line junkie and a bit of a techno-bigot.
>>
>>-Andy
>>
>>
>
>
Re: Compilers and configuration tools
Posted by Rivaaj Jumna <ri...@gmail.com>.
Lol, fair enough :-)
What about debugging tools? What would you suggest to get started with?
On 10/25/05, acoliver@apache.org <ac...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Rivaaj Jumna wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > This may be a bit off topic but what does a harmony developers desktop
> look
> > like? My reason for asking is that I've been groomed on developing using
> an
> > ide in the windows environemnt, Visual Studio 6.0 and the like.
> >
> > What sort of tools would one use on a Linux environment, eclipse cdt
> > perhaps? I'm not afraid of command lines, :-) but they're a barrier to
> entry
> > for someone like myself who would just like to explore the code base.
> >
> > Regards
> > Rivaaj
> >
>
> Grab "cygwin" and install a bash shell for windows, the GCC compiler,
> automake, make and vi. Do not install emacs because it has a speech
> impediment.
>
> There is a certain bias I have that tends to think that visual
> programmers do not tend to be able to write compilers and the such. If
> command lines are a barrier to entry, wait till you meet hexcodes and
> relocatable memory addressing. However that may just be that I'm a
> command line junkie and a bit of a techno-bigot.
>
> -Andy
>
>
Re: Compilers and configuration tools
Posted by Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen <th...@gmail.com>.
Leo Simons wrote:
>Whoohooh! An actual vi-vs-emacs discussion! Now we are *really* getting started!
>
>
vi is quite a lot ahead of emacs.
http://jvi.sourceforge.net/ versus http://jemacs.sourceforge.net/
But anyone who chooses either must love to type a *lot* :)
--
Thorbjørn
Re: Compilers and configuration tools
Posted by Dalibor Topic <ro...@kaffe.org>.
Leo Simons wrote:
> Whoohooh! An actual vi-vs-emacs discussion! Now we are *really* getting started!
>
ed is the one true editor.
cheers,
dalibor topic,
patiently awaiting the first ruby on rails vs. java discussion on this
list :)
Re: Compilers and configuration tools
Posted by Leo Simons <ma...@leosimons.com>.
Whoohooh! An actual vi-vs-emacs discussion! Now we are *really* getting started!
Leo "SubEthaEdit rules" Simons
Re: Compilers and configuration tools
Posted by ac...@apache.org.
>
> Sure, let?s all just forget about cheese-burgers & fries and start eating
> vegetables because they are really healthy food and sustain as any other
> one (:-P). You could still use vi (i some times do), as you can still
> program asc under 8086, but if you really want to increase your
> productivity start using a UI. There are a lot of tools to write C/C++
> code, i basically use LCC to develop C plain code, but Eclipse CDT is a
> very good UI, you will only have to download a C/C++ compiler (CDT dosen?t
> come with a compiler) like gcc, or even MVC++ running under wine (or
> something like that, i don?t know any one who actually used MVC under
> wine).
>
> Andy, dont get mad at me, this is just my point of view, and i tend to
> admire oldies (:-)) who are still running things under vi.
>
Humm...you work at IBM....<insert appropriate comment about OS/390, AIX,
and JCL here>
I use vi because one of my first professional jobs was working in
Alabama at a state government place. I'd been working on OS/2 and had
little exposure to UNIX. When I sat down and had to change a few config
files I looked up at this crusty ol' programmer and said "what's the
editor called on this thing"... he got visibly annoyed with me and said
"Son, I don know how they do things up* there in Florida, but you in the
Bible belt now. There are two things you need to know: God created the
world in 6 days, and he did it with VEEEEE, EYYYYYYEEE."
Since I couldn't argue with that impeccable logic my love affair with
things that did not make me wait began. I'm only now beginning to use
IDEs with Java due to annotations and things, but you have to admit...it
is slowwwwwwwwww. and gets in your way.
-Andy
* Florida is one of those states that every true southerner knows is in
a time-space warp. While it is actually "up there" in the North with
all those yankees, one must drive below "the south" to get there. Thus
although I grew up in a state that most folks would locate on the globe
"south", I will never have the honor of being a true southerner because
I grew up "north" in Florida. There are alternative theories of how
Florida got "down there" (which is really "up there") many of which
theorize that it had premonition of Castro and broke off of Cuba and ran
smack into the southern border of the US a few millenia before Castro
was born (just for safe measure). What is important is that proper
'merican is spoken in Florida and the English language is properly
normalized to have a plural form of "you" best known as "Y'all" and that
it can be properly typed on a US keyboard without straining your
fingersr too far off the "home row".
> []s
>
> Jo?o
>
>
>>There is a certain bias I have that tends to think that visual
>>programmers do not tend to be able to write compilers and the such. If
>>command lines are a barrier to entry, wait till you meet hexcodes and
>>relocatable memory addressing. However that may just be that I'm a
>>command line junkie and a bit of a techno-bigot.
>
>
>>-Andy
>
>
>
>
Re: Compilers and configuration tools
Posted by Dermot Dunnion <dd...@cryptall.com>.
Sorry to add yet more options; a vast array of choices isn't always a
good thing ;-) I use dev-cpp to compile with gcc under Windows. That
said, I've also played a little with lcc and it does look good. Another
option I used to use is Vide on top of Borland's free compiler.
Just about staying on-topic but jumping back a a few messages; I do use
a hex editor to pull apart protocols/data formats but I still prefer a
GUI-based IDE and debugger. Please don't take this as flamebait, just a
different point of view. I think people should feel free to use whatever
tools make them personally comfortable and productive while fitting with
the overall project goals.
Dermot.
jlopes@br.ibm.com wrote:
>>Rivaaj Jumna wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hi
>>>
>>>This may be a bit off topic but what does a harmony developers desktop
>>>
>>>
>look
>
>
>>>like? My reason for asking is that I've been groomed on developing
>>>
>>>
>using an
>
>
>>>ide in the windows environemnt, Visual Studio 6.0 and the like.
>>>
>>>What sort of tools would one use on a Linux environment, eclipse cdt
>>>perhaps? I'm not afraid of command lines, :-) but they're a barrier to
>>>
>>>
>entry
>
>
>>>for someone like myself who would just like to explore the code base.
>>>
>>>Regards
>>>Rivaaj
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Grab "cygwin" and install a bash shell for windows, the GCC compiler,
>>automake, make and vi. Do not install emacs because it has a speech
>>impediment.
>>
>>
>
>Sure, let�s all just forget about cheese-burgers & fries and start eating
>vegetables because they are really healthy food and sustain as any other
>one (:-P). You could still use vi (i some times do), as you can still
>program asc under 8086, but if you really want to increase your
>productivity start using a UI. There are a lot of tools to write C/C++
>code, i basically use LCC to develop C plain code, but Eclipse CDT is a
>very good UI, you will only have to download a C/C++ compiler (CDT dosen�t
>come with a compiler) like gcc, or even MVC++ running under wine (or
>something like that, i don�t know any one who actually used MVC under
>wine).
>
>Andy, dont get mad at me, this is just my point of view, and i tend to
>admire oldies (:-)) who are still running things under vi.
>
> []s
>
> Jo�o
>
>
>
>>There is a certain bias I have that tends to think that visual
>>programmers do not tend to be able to write compilers and the such. If
>>command lines are a barrier to entry, wait till you meet hexcodes and
>>relocatable memory addressing. However that may just be that I'm a
>>command line junkie and a bit of a techno-bigot.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>-Andy
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Compilers and configuration tools
Posted by jl...@br.ibm.com.
>Rivaaj Jumna wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> This may be a bit off topic but what does a harmony developers desktop
look
>> like? My reason for asking is that I've been groomed on developing
using an
>> ide in the windows environemnt, Visual Studio 6.0 and the like.
>>
>> What sort of tools would one use on a Linux environment, eclipse cdt
>> perhaps? I'm not afraid of command lines, :-) but they're a barrier to
entry
>> for someone like myself who would just like to explore the code base.
>>
>> Regards
>> Rivaaj
>>
>
>Grab "cygwin" and install a bash shell for windows, the GCC compiler,
>automake, make and vi. Do not install emacs because it has a speech
>impediment.
Sure, let´s all just forget about cheese-burgers & fries and start eating
vegetables because they are really healthy food and sustain as any other
one (:-P). You could still use vi (i some times do), as you can still
program asc under 8086, but if you really want to increase your
productivity start using a UI. There are a lot of tools to write C/C++
code, i basically use LCC to develop C plain code, but Eclipse CDT is a
very good UI, you will only have to download a C/C++ compiler (CDT dosen´t
come with a compiler) like gcc, or even MVC++ running under wine (or
something like that, i don´t know any one who actually used MVC under
wine).
Andy, dont get mad at me, this is just my point of view, and i tend to
admire oldies (:-)) who are still running things under vi.
[]s
João
>There is a certain bias I have that tends to think that visual
>programmers do not tend to be able to write compilers and the such. If
>command lines are a barrier to entry, wait till you meet hexcodes and
>relocatable memory addressing. However that may just be that I'm a
>command line junkie and a bit of a techno-bigot.
>-Andy
Re: Compilers and configuration tools
Posted by ac...@apache.org.
Rivaaj Jumna wrote:
> Hi
>
> This may be a bit off topic but what does a harmony developers desktop look
> like? My reason for asking is that I've been groomed on developing using an
> ide in the windows environemnt, Visual Studio 6.0 and the like.
>
> What sort of tools would one use on a Linux environment, eclipse cdt
> perhaps? I'm not afraid of command lines, :-) but they're a barrier to entry
> for someone like myself who would just like to explore the code base.
>
> Regards
> Rivaaj
>
Grab "cygwin" and install a bash shell for windows, the GCC compiler,
automake, make and vi. Do not install emacs because it has a speech
impediment.
There is a certain bias I have that tends to think that visual
programmers do not tend to be able to write compilers and the such. If
command lines are a barrier to entry, wait till you meet hexcodes and
relocatable memory addressing. However that may just be that I'm a
command line junkie and a bit of a techno-bigot.
-Andy
Re: Compilers and configuration tools
Posted by Rivaaj Jumna <ri...@gmail.com>.
Hi
This may be a bit off topic but what does a harmony developers desktop look
like? My reason for asking is that I've been groomed on developing using an
ide in the windows environemnt, Visual Studio 6.0 and the like.
What sort of tools would one use on a Linux environment, eclipse cdt
perhaps? I'm not afraid of command lines, :-) but they're a barrier to entry
for someone like myself who would just like to explore the code base.
Regards
Rivaaj
Re: Compilers and configuration tools
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>.
Right now, I think that we're all interested in seeing support for
whatever compilers people are willing to support.
So if we have support for both GCC and MSVC++ on Windows, so much the
better for the project.
geir
On Oct 25, 2005, at 10:15 AM, Francisco Andrades Grassi wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> Tanuj Mathur wrote:
>
>> Hey,
>>
>>>> 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).
>>>>
>>> Right - but still - we can't force people to go buy Express.
>>>
>>>
>> Just to clear up any confusion, the VC++ 2003 command line compiler
>> and the required utilities and libraries are available as a free
>> download, exactly like GCC.
>>
>
> That's not correct. GCC is Free Software, VC++ 2003 compiler,
> although a free-of-charge download, is propritary software (you
> don't have access to the source and can't create derivative works
> under any circumstance). Even more, I believe the license on the VC+
> + 2003 compiler does not allow you to run commercial applications.
>
> Please do not compare the proprietary compiler from Microsoft with
> GCC in terms of 'free availability'. You may not like the GPL
> license on GCC (which I really like), but that another issue.
>
> --
> Francisco Andrades Grassi
> www.nextj.com
> Tlf: +58-414-125-7415
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org
Re: Compilers and configuration tools
Posted by Francisco Andrades Grassi <fa...@nextj.com>.
Greetings,
Tanuj Mathur wrote:
> Hey,
>
>>> 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).
>> Right - but still - we can't force people to go buy Express.
>>
>
> Just to clear up any confusion, the VC++ 2003 command line compiler
> and the required utilities and libraries are available as a free
> download, exactly like GCC.
That's not correct. GCC is Free Software, VC++ 2003 compiler, although a
free-of-charge download, is propritary software (you don't have access
to the source and can't create derivative works under any circumstance).
Even more, I believe the license on the VC++ 2003 compiler does not
allow you to run commercial applications.
Please do not compare the proprietary compiler from Microsoft with GCC
in terms of 'free availability'. You may not like the GPL license on GCC
(which I really like), but that another issue.
--
Francisco Andrades Grassi
www.nextj.com
Tlf: +58-414-125-7415
Re: Compilers and configuration tools
Posted by Tanuj Mathur <ta...@gmail.com>.
Hey,
> > 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).
>
> Right - but still - we can't force people to go buy Express.
>
Just to clear up any confusion, the VC++ 2003 command line compiler
and the required utilities and libraries are available as a free
download, exactly like GCC.
It is not necessary to have the Visual C++ IDE in order to make use
of the compiler. There are a number of free C++ IDE's available that
can integrate with multiple compilers at the backend, including the
VC++ 2003 compiler. The Code::Blocks and Relo IDEs come to mind.
Also, I believe that MS plans to release the compiler toolkit for
the upcoming Visual C++ 2005 as a free download (once the product is
officially released in the market). That's another standards
compliant, optimizing compiler for us to play with.
So i don't think there are any commercial dependencies that we have
to worry about as far as supporting MSVC is concerned.
- tanuj
Re: Compilers and configuration tools
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>.
On Oct 24, 2005, at 5:44 AM, Tanuj Mathur wrote:
> 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.
Excellent.
> 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
That's great. I have no problem with multiple supported compilers,
btw. We should actually strive for portable types rather than
compiler extensions (which is what got us down this path in the first
place...)
> 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).
Right - but still - we can't force people to go buy Express.
> 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.
Yep! +1 from me.
geir
>
> - tanuj
>
>
> On 10/22/05, Apache Harmony Bootstrap JVM <bo...@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 <da...@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. <ge...@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
>>
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org
Re: Compilers and configuration tools
Posted by Tanuj Mathur <ta...@gmail.com>.
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 <bo...@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 <da...@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. <ge...@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
>
Re: Compilers and configuration tools
Posted by ac...@apache.org.
So we need to at least support gcc. It ain't the best but its
ubiquitous. If someone so motivated wants to maintain MSVC
compatibility they should be encouraged. No policy is necessary as the
first is implied in the project mission. It is obvious however that
strictly supporting Intel/MSVC/etc compilers is contra to the project's
mission (since that would tie us to particular
platforms/processors/vendors).
-andy
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
> On Oct 21, 2005, at 3:23 PM, Apache Harmony Bootstrap JVM 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?
>
>
> I don't think there's a reason to mandate at this point, as long as the
> compilers don't collide.
>
> However this turns out, I'm really against forcing people to have to
> pay for a compiler when there are good free ones available.
>
> geir
>
>>
>> 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 <da...@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. <ge...@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
>>
>
--
Andrew C. Oliver
SuperLink Software, Inc.
Java to Excel using POI
http://www.superlinksoftware.com/services/poi
Commercial support including features added/implemented, bugs fixed.
Re: Compilers and configuration tools
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>.
On Oct 21, 2005, at 3:23 PM, Apache Harmony Bootstrap JVM 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?
I don't think there's a reason to mandate at this point, as long as
the compilers don't collide.
However this turns out, I'm really against forcing people to have to
pay for a compiler when there are good free ones available.
geir
>
> 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 <da...@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. <ge...@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
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org