Re: libtool and cl

[Bob Friesenhahn]

On Sat, 29 Mar 2003, Charles Wilson wrote:
>
> Also wrt Bob, concerning mingw vs cl: IMO, if you're using cl and
> relying on its non-standard extensions to C and C++, then you are
> obviously not trying to write portable code.  In that case, you should
> simply use the MSVC support for building DLLs and static libs, and NOT
> use libtool or autoconf or automake at all.  Since you're not worried
> about portability, use the tools MS provides to make your life easier;
> why go thru the pain of creating a *build* system that is portable, when
> your *code* is not?  The autotools are about portability.

Not all of the code has to be portable in order to benefit from
libtool.  There could be a large portable component that works across
platforms, along with a GUI component for Windows.  Using GNU auto*
tools for everything is a lot easier than using GNU build tools for
parts, and the Visual Studio IDE for another, or attempting to
maintain entirely parallel build environments.

The way Microsoft does things, if you use anything but the bare bones
C API and static libraries, you have no choice but to use non-standard
extensions.

Bob
======================================
Bob Friesenhahn
address@hidden
http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen