Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!feed.news.qwest.net!mpls-nntp-06.inet.qwest.net!216.196.98.145.MISMATCH!border4.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news.iecc.com!nerds-end From: Hans-Peter Diettrich Newsgroups: comp.compilers Subject: Re: GCC is 25 years old today Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 10:58:24 +0200 Organization: Compilers Central Lines: 35 Sender: news@iecc.com Approved: comp.compilers@iecc.com Message-ID: <12-03-069@comp.compilers> References: <12-03-051@comp.compilers> <12-03-053@comp.compilers> <12-03-062@comp.compilers> <12-03-068@comp.compilers> NNTP-Posting-Host: news.iecc.com X-Trace: leila.iecc.com 1333096003 27390 64.57.183.58 (30 Mar 2012 08:26:43 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@iecc.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 08:26:43 +0000 (UTC) Keywords: GCC, history Posted-Date: 30 Mar 2012 04:26:43 EDT X-submission-address: compilers@iecc.com X-moderator-address: compilers-request@iecc.com X-FAQ-and-archives: http://compilers.iecc.com Xref: csiph.com comp.compilers:536 BGB schrieb: > more recently, I have ended up mostly using MSVC, mostly because: > it was also freely available (via the Platform SDK); > it supported some features which at the time GCC didn't support (namely, > Win64). IMO GCC and Windows is a special case, because the GNU developers never really wanted to support this (non-free non-POSIX) platform. Cygwin and MinGW do not fully support the WinAPI, and lack further development support. Most GNU projects, including the development tools and libraries, do not build on Windows, they mostly fail already in ./configure. In the context of this group it should be mentioned that a bunch of *languages* are involved in building GCC/GNU projects, even if these languages are mostly interpreted, not compiled. See shell scripts, make and auto... extensions, M4 and whatever else is required or suggested by the FSF. IMO nowadays the bare compiler is the least important part, WRT the choice of a *development system*. Languages are another issue: you'll hardly find two C++ compilers which are ABI compatible, not to mention compatibility with other OO languages. Java went an radically different way WRT portable code, eliminating OS dependencies in the VM instead of fragile adaptation in source code and libraries. This approach makes it much easier to develop applications for multiple platforms, including multiple POSIX flavors. I may be wrong here, but IMO the availability of Linux applications depends heavily on the goodwill of the platform maintainers, which have to make every single project compile, build and run on their specific platform. Even if this is not a compiler issue, it suggests to properly consider the role of an compiler in the entire development process. DoDi