On 04 May 2010, at 16:17, Andrew Brunner wrote: > On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 10:09 AM, Jonas Maebe <jonas.ma...@elis.ugent.be> > wrote: > >> Cross-compilers can be just as multi-threaded as "native" ones. This is a >> completely orthogonal feature. >> > True statement but I fear does not address the issue at hand.
"The issue at hand" of this thread was "why is there only a Win32->Win64 cross-compiler and no native Win64 compiler" (well, originally it was "why is the win64 compiler listed with the win32 binaries"). > You > guys really need to tap talent - there's gotta be somebody here that > wants to solve the compile times... And when that is solved... the > argument of slow compile times as it relates to the reason of not > having a native 64bit Windows compiler will then become mute... There is no such argument, since nobody at any point argued that a native Win64 compiler would be faster (other than maybe you in your last post). > But then again from your prospective... I would certainly really mull > the complaints over since most likely you two would have to oversee > the work and get lots of questions along the way. Seems to me like > work is being averted here... :-( Speeding up compilation is always nice (and if anyone wants to dive into the unit loading logic, solve its existing problems and make it multi-threading safe, I'd be delighted -- I already spent several weeks on trying, and largely failing, to merely solve particular bugs in it), but I fail to see how that is in any way related to the current thread. Jonas_______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
