Re: The portability sacred cow

From	JohnF <john@please.see.sig.for.email.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: The portability sacred cow
Date	2014-04-26 06:04 +0000
Organization	PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC
Message-ID	<ljfia3$69u$1@reader1.panix.com> (permalink)
References	(1 earlier) <lj7ri7$143h$1@gwdu112.gwdg.de> <ljcgrt$gr2$2@news.xmission.com> <ljcvom$mb4$1@reader1.panix.com> <lje8ro$g9i$1@news.xmission.com> <20140425111954.344@kylheku.com>

Show all headers | View raw

Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> wrote:
> Kenny McCormack <gazelle@shell.xmission.com> wrote:
>> JohnF  <john@please.see.sig.for.email.com> wrote:
>>> Kenny McCormack <gazelle@shell.xmission.com> wrote:
>>>> MS's compilers are like the 800 pound gorilla.
>>>> It's what people follow.
>>>
>>>Off-topic, but what are the pluses/minuses of
>>>the mingw compiler
>>>  http://www.mingw.org/
>>>for C programs under windows?
>>>And, while you're at it, also compare and contrast
>>>the dos djgpp if you're familiar with it
>>>  http://www.delorie.com/djgpp/
>>>And any other similar compiler.
>>
>> Those compilers are good if you've developed your code
>> with Unix/Linux/gcc and just want a quick port to Windows.
>> Like, for example, when they want to produce Windows versions
>> of things like AWK, GAWK, Perl, etc. Or things like cut, join,
>> paste, wc, etc, etc.
>>
>> But most people are not like us (so it says in The Great Gatsby).
>> They are coming at it from the other side - they are developing for,
>> by, and on Windows, so they want a compiler with Windows sensibilities.
>> The MS compilers are therefore their first (and basically only) choice.
> 
> You can call Windows API's when developing with MinGW.
> The C library that is used is Microsoft's; you can make programs that can
> ship as nothing but a single .exe file, and run on people's Windows boxes.
> What is lacking is a resource compiler for defining dialogs and strings.
> Or is it?
>   Googling slightly: http://www.mingw.org/wiki/MS_resource_compiler

Thanks Kenny, Kaz, et al. "Developed with unix/gcc and just want
a quick port to windows" is indeed what I want, and it sounds like
mingw is indeed a good choice for that purpose.
-- 
John Forkosh  ( mailto:  j@f.com  where j=john and f=forkosh )

Thread

The portability sacred cow jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2014-04-20 23:14 +0200
  Re: The portability sacred cow jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2014-04-20 23:34 +0200
    Re: The portability sacred cow Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2014-04-20 21:20 -0700
      Re: The portability sacred cow gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2014-04-21 04:35 +0000
      Re: The portability sacred cow Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2014-04-21 05:10 +0000
        Re: The portability sacred cow gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2014-04-21 05:31 +0000
        Re: The portability sacred cow <william@wilbur.25thandClement.com> - 2014-04-20 23:50 -0700
  Re: The portability sacred cow jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2014-04-20 23:39 +0200
  Re: The portability sacred cow <william@wilbur.25thandClement.com> - 2014-04-20 23:37 -0700
    Re: The portability sacred cow Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2014-04-21 20:25 +1200
  Re: The portability sacred cow glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-04-21 07:10 +0000
  Re: The portability sacred cow Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2014-04-21 20:32 +1200
  Re: The portability sacred cow David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2014-04-21 16:46 +0200
    Re: The portability sacred cow <william@wilbur.25thandClement.com> - 2014-04-21 10:04 -0700
      Re: The portability sacred cow David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2014-04-21 21:02 +0200
  Re: The portability sacred cow Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2014-04-22 02:52 -0700
    Re: The portability sacred cow Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2014-04-22 23:18 +1200
      Re: The portability sacred cow gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2014-04-22 11:49 +0000
    Re: The portability sacred cow jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2014-04-22 14:48 +0200
    Re: The portability sacred cow Richard <rgrdev_@gmail.com> - 2014-04-22 14:58 +0100
      Re: The portability sacred cow Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2014-04-22 07:37 -0700
    Re: The portability sacred cow luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2014-04-22 21:52 -0700
  Re: The portability sacred cow Johannes Bauer <dfnsonfsduifb@gmx.de> - 2014-04-22 16:58 +0200
    Re: The portability sacred cow jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2014-04-22 17:24 +0200
      Re: The portability sacred cow jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2014-04-22 17:25 +0200
    Re: The portability sacred cow Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2014-04-22 19:11 +0100
  Re: The portability sacred cow jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2014-04-22 21:59 +0200
    Re: The portability sacred cow Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2014-04-22 14:02 -0700
      Re: The portability sacred cow jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2014-04-23 01:04 +0200
        Re: The portability sacred cow <william@wilbur.25thandClement.com> - 2014-04-22 17:52 -0700
          Re: The portability sacred cow <william@wilbur.25thandClement.com> - 2014-04-22 19:15 -0700
      Re: The portability sacred cow jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2014-04-23 01:10 +0200
      Re: The portability sacred cow Thomas Jahns <jahns@idontlikespam.dkrz.de> - 2014-04-23 09:53 +0200
        Re: The portability sacred cow gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2014-04-25 02:21 +0000
          Re: The portability sacred cow JohnF <john@please.see.sig.for.email.com> - 2014-04-25 06:36 +0000
            Re: The portability sacred cow Richard <rgrdev_@gmail.com> - 2014-04-25 14:02 +0200
            Re: The portability sacred cow gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2014-04-25 18:17 +0000
              Re: The portability sacred cow Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2014-04-25 18:27 +0000
                Re: The portability sacred cow Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2014-04-25 21:57 -0700
                Re: The portability sacred cow Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-04-26 00:02 -0500
                Re: The portability sacred cow Richard <rgrdev_@gmail.com> - 2014-04-26 11:35 +0200
                Re: The portability sacred cow JohnF <john@please.see.sig.for.email.com> - 2014-04-26 06:04 +0000
              Re: The portability sacred cow jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2014-04-25 23:08 +0200
                Re: The portability sacred cow glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-04-25 21:52 +0000
          Re: The portability sacred cow Thomas Jahns <jahns@idontlikespam.dkrz.de> - 2014-04-25 11:27 +0200
            Re: The portability sacred cow Richard <rgrdev_@gmail.com> - 2014-04-25 14:03 +0200
              Re: The portability sacred cow gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2014-04-25 18:18 +0000
              Re: The portability sacred cow "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-04-26 20:04 -0400
            Re: The portability sacred cow Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2014-04-25 06:05 -0700
              Re: The portability sacred cow Thomas Jahns <jahns@idontlikespam.dkrz.de> - 2014-04-25 17:43 +0200
                Re: The portability sacred cow Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2014-04-25 10:48 -0700

csiph-web