On Sun, 17 Jan 2010, Craig Silverstein wrote: > I do something similar to this for projects I write that have to > compile under windows (MSVC or nmake). However, instead of this > approach: > > } Instead of touching the Unix config.h file, a dedicated winconfig.h file > } is introduced, and all the instances of: > } > } #ifdef HAVE_CONFIG_H > } #include "config.h" > } #endif > } > } are replaced with: > } > } #include "sysconfig.h" > > which is prety invasive, I do the following:
In terms of the current patch payload, yes. In terms of resulting lines of code, no. In general terms, I'd rather keep all the ifdef-ish out the main files, and isolated into seldomly accessed ones (like the proposed sysconfig.h). > create a windows directory, and create a version of config.h in the > windows directory that is basically manually set up (like this patch > does). Then, when compiling under windows, I just add > -Iwindows > to the compile line. This should result in the windows config.h being > preferred over the top-level config.h. > > I don't see any reason not to do that, though it'll be work to keep > the windows config.h manually synced with the unix config as changes > are made to autoconf.ac. But I believe such changes are pretty rare > at this point, so maybe it's a good trade-off. > > As for adding in a windows-specific Makefile (the second patch), I > believe the pcre path is to use cmake rather than nmake, so I don't > think this adds very much. (And maybe cmake automatically makes a > config.h? What do windows developers do nowadays?) What would be > more useful I think, if we don't already have it, would be a .sln and > .vcproj files, for building under MSVC. But I don't actually develop > in windows, so I don't know. Come to think of it, I'm probably not > the right person to ask... >From a standpoint of Unix developers/maintainers w/out having access to MS tools, I'm not sure this is a good idea. Using a makefile.win allows to Windows developers that owns MSVC, to simply run the supplied and MSVC-default nmake, while allows Unix developers/maintainers to simply edit a text file. Anyway, whatever method you guys choose, it'd be good to have a way to build PCRE on Windows w/out installing extra software (like cmake). - Davide -- ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/pcre-dev
