[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [XBoard-devel] Winboard source
From: |
Tim Mann |
Subject: |
Re: [XBoard-devel] Winboard source |
Date: |
Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:37:53 -0800 |
I've been way too busy catching up on things around here since I got
back from vacation, but I'll try to chip away at answering some mail...
On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 11:40:22 -0600, "Dan Jenkins" <address@hidden> wrote:
> >2. The Visual Studio Projectfiles don't manage the right directories and
> >files. (VS crashed with a DrWatson if i try to compile - never see this
> >before :(( )
>
> I never had much luck compiling from the VStudio IDE either. However, when
> I would just use nmake on the Makefile, it compiled fine for me, last time I
> checked...
Huh, I thought compiling was working for me from within MSVS, although I
usually just use nmake from the command line. I only have MSVC++ 5.0,
though.
> This could be because of the CRLF problem... Although, I did notice a
> couple of resources in there that didn't seem to want to load for some
> reason. I never looked at it too closely, though.
I haven't tried loading it into the resource editor for a while. I had
to make a few manual changes so that the cygwin resource compiler would
compile it, but I thought they were all compatible. At least the MSVS
resource compiler would still compile it...
> >4. The makefile don't work for me (wrong path and other stuff).
> >5. The include path of all files are broken because we have a new
> >file/dir struct.
?? Works for me. How did I build 4.2.7 if that was all wrong?
> I agree it would be nice to upgrade the project to at least VS 6.
Please don't break it for VS 5 if you want me to do more work on it. :-)
I don't want to have to buy a new version of MS proprietary software in
order to work on a free software project. I'd much rather migrate to using
cygwin to build. Unfortunately cygwin doesn't have a nice graphical resource
editor.
> If it's
> something that you guys think would be a good thing, I could also work on
> making a VS .Net 2003 project for it. One thing nice about the 2003 VC++
> .Net is that it's compiler is much more ANSI compliant than VC++ 6.0. I
> went to TechEd this last summer, and I think the numbers they gave at one of
> the seminars was something like:
>
> VC++ 6.0 76% ANSI compliant
> VC++ .Net 85% ANSI compliant
> gnu g++ 96% ANSI compliant
> VC++ .Net 2003 97% ANSI compliant
>
> Granted, it was Microsoft employees giving the seminar, but still fairly
> impressive improvements in ANSI compliance.
For plain C code, I suspect the numbers are close to 100% for all those
compilers.
--
Tim Mann address@hidden http://tim-mann.org/
- Re: [XBoard-devel] Winboard source,
Tim Mann <=