On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 07:49:58PM +0100, James Mansion
<[email protected]> wrote:
> For C++, yes, though in Microsoft's case its actually less bad than gcc
> versions.
No, for C, and it's far worse than for gcc (at least for non-microsoft
platforms, on windows, gcc necessarily has to follow all the
incompatibilities that microsoft forces on the world) :/
> But I think you're making an overgeneralisation saying that about a C
> code if its been compiled with
> appropriate flags.
Well, if you used all those appropriate flags (I don't think there are
flags for all incompatibilities), then that's fine.
However, from your comment about gcc and c++, it seems you are confused
- I am talking solely about binary compatibility here, and that's set by
microsoft, nothing gcc could do about it for example.
So my original suggestion of using a compiler known to be comaptible
still holds (especially since EV works in a number of my programs, and
activestate got it to work, and the crucial difference seems to be that
both activestate and I use the matching compiler).
--
The choice of a Deliantra, the free code+content MORPG
-----==- _GNU_ http://www.deliantra.net
----==-- _ generation
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / [email protected]
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\
_______________________________________________
libev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.schmorp.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libev
