"Rainer Deyke" <rain...@eldwood.com> wrote in message news:i4pp13$rg...@digitalmars.com... > On 8/21/2010 17:14, Nick Sabalausky wrote: >> "Rainer Deyke" <rain...@eldwood.com> wrote in message >> news:i4pju0$1pj...@digitalmars.com... >>> Why would that matter? Why would you want to compile the compiler for a >>> platform, on that platform? >>> >> >> To use that platform to compile something. > > It took me a while to make any sense of that statement. You're talking > about a situation where no compiler binary exists that runs on your > platform, so you want to compile the compiler for that platform on the > platform itself, right? > > The platform the compiler targets and the platform on which the compiler > runs are orthogonal issues. If you want the compiler to produce native > binaries on platform X, it must first be able to target platform X. If > the compiler can target platform X, then it is easy enough to create a > binary of the compiler that runs on platform X by compiling on platform > A. From there it's a simple matter to write a script that compiles, > packages, and uploads the compiler for all supported platforms. It > should therefore never be necessary to compile the compiler itself on > platform X. Or am I missing something? >
Yea, I think maybe I was just confused. To my knowledge, DMD doesn't do cross-compilation, so I managed to get it into my head that "If DMD runs on platform X, then it'll produce working binaries for Platform X", which of course is stupid ;)
