Re: Compiler creation toolkit

theresistor@gmail.com
Fri, 20 Jun 2008 12:57:33 -0700 (PDT)

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[3 earlier articles]
Re: Compiler creation toolkit ang.usenet@gmail.com (Aaron Gray) (2008-06-11)
Re: Compiler creation toolkit anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (2008-06-11)
Re: Compiler creation toolkit rich@pennware.com (Richard Pennington) (2008-06-14)
Re: Compiler creation toolkit scholz.lothar@gmail.com (2008-06-17)
Re: Compiler creation toolkit scholz.lothar@gmail.com (2008-06-17)
Re: Compiler creation toolkit bc@freeuk.com (Bartc) (2008-06-18)
Re: Compiler creation toolkit theresistor@gmail.com (2008-06-20)
Re: Compiler creation toolkit ademakov@gmail.com (Aleksey Demakov) (2008-07-05)
Re: Compiler creation toolkit ademakov@gmail.com (Aleksey Demakov) (2008-07-05)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: theresistor@gmail.com
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 12:57:33 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 08-06-018 08-06-022 08-06-026 08-06-038
Keywords: tools
Posted-Date: 21 Jun 2008 12:59:20 EDT

On Jun 17, 3:48 pm, scholz.lot...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> And more important for my feeling of not useing LLVM is that Windows
> seems to have no high priority for the developers. None of the latest
> releases compiles 100% without errors. 2.2 didn't compile at all.


All of the recent release should compile and run fine in MinGW or
Cygwin, which are the two supported configurations. Support for
building it with Visual Studio will only happen when someone who cares
about it steps up to maintain it.


--Owen


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.