On 2004.07.22, Jamie Rasmussen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is great Dossy, thanks!
You motivated me by producing your own Win32 builds, so everyone who wanted Win32 builds should thank you! :-) > Other than the type of "freeness", which I'd argue isn't the first concern > of most people running AOLserver on Windows, would using Open Watcom provide > any benefits? Microsoft's compiler is pretty much the standard for Windows > developers, and is used by most of the third-party libraries that non-core > AOLserver modules link against. Good point: what WOULD be the advantage of using Open Watcom other than just being a Microsoft-alternative? The one advantage I see is that Open Watcom is OSS, so we would have access to the compiler source. But, frankly, compiler hacking doesn't turn me on, so there's little appeal to me personally here. I would like to hear what others think are material advantages of using Open Watcom over Microsoft's compiler ... -- Dossy -- Dossy Shiobara mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Panoptic Computer Network web: http://www.panoptic.com/ "He realized the fastest way to change is to laugh at your own folly -- then you can let go and quickly move on." (p. 70) -- AOLserver - http://www.aolserver.com/ To Remove yourself from this list, simply send an email to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> with the body of "SIGNOFF AOLSERVER" in the email message. You can leave the Subject: field of your email blank.
