On 6 August 2010 00:06, Hans-Peter Diettrich <drdiettri...@aol.com> wrote: > Henry Vermaak schrieb: > >> Build systems seem to be a constant itch. See a list here: >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_build_automation_software > > Shouldn't we add FPC to that list?
No, because fpc is a compiler, but we can add fpcmake and fpmake. > IMO the list completely ignores the existence of platform independent > development systems, like for Basic, Java, .NET and other interpreted or > VM-based languages. It's a selfmade complication, when a compiler-based > programming language allows for a platform-independent RTL, and that chance > is not taken in writing portable applications. In so far a portable gcc is > only half baked, without an equally portable libc (and other libraries) - at > least for writing really portable code. I really don't have a clue what you mean. The list shows build automation software. A lot of those are platform independent and language dependant. What does this have to do with Basic/Java/.Net? Gcc/libc is probably the most cross platform compiler/rtl, since you won't have a kernel if gcc isn't ported, and you won't have a userspace if libc isn't ported. Henry _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
