On December 18, 2002 03:36 pm, Francois Gouget wrote: > Shouldn't we have 'wine' somewhere in the name to avoid possible > conflicts? Of course it would be nice to also have something that > reminds of mingw so that we can later have other wrappers for Visual > C++, Borland C++, etc. (if the need arises, I don't see it right now) > > So: > wcc
I suggest this one initially, but Alexandre objected (rightfully so) that it is too generic. It's a nice name, but we might need wrappers for different things in the future, and it does not scale. Besides, we want the name to say that we make gcc look like MinGW. > wgcc This one can work too, not bad. In fact, I like it: short, and to the point. The MinGW compiler is still called gcc, so this works out very nicely. > wincc > wingcc Long, and undescriptive. I'd say no. > winecc Too generic, it's the same (but longer :)) as wcc. > winegcc Why not wgcc? > wmingcc This can work too. So I am OK with the following: wgcc mingcc wmingcc Probably wgcc is the nicest, shortest, and maybe most easily recognizable for people. Alexandre, if renaming is acceptable, take your pick! :) just s/mingcc/<your pick>/g into the patch... -- Dimi.