On 12.04.08 08:52:38, Alan W. Irwin wrote: > On 2008-04-12 10:07+0200 Andreas Pakulat wrote: >> <personal opinion> >> My experience with MinGW so far is that its simply not ready yet for >> projects such as boost or KDE, they still need some time. Thats why >> I won't do work on getting KDevelop4 working on MinGW - at least not >> without someone paying for it. >> </personal opinion> > > That's fine, but then somebody else with access to windows should > volunteer to do that testing since MinGW is an extremely important platform. > > Finally, from our PLplot experience, MinGW (fortunately we do have a couple > of developers with access to that platform) works fine if you make some > special adjustments for its needs. So Andreas's above statement probably > needs to be reversed, i.e., boost and KDE need some time/effort to work on > MinGW.
I won't continue that discussion here, except for the following: Both KDE and boost use pretty advanced/new C++ features and if MinGW breaks down on valid C++ code with an internal compiler error thats not an indication of adjusting _our_ code to mingw but quite the contrary. Its after all gcc, but unfortunately doesn't accept all valid gcc code at all. I'll be the first one to try out MinGW which comes with gcc 4.x, but until that is released MinGW has just too many problems to try to make KDE work on it for me. There actually others that use MinGW and try to adjust to all its quirks. Andreas -- You'd like to do it instantaneously, but that's too slow. _______________________________________________ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
