bartc wrote:
Actually, I remember struggling to get even tcc installed! I think I had to compile from source, using configure and make (and that worked, this being Linux). But didn't know how to set it up to work from anywhere. So CC=tcc might not work.
If it comes with a standard gnu config arrangement, and you let it use all its defaults, "make install" should install it in /usr/local or some such well-known place.
By programmer-hostile do you mean Windows?
Yes. At least it seems that way to people who are used to developing on unix systems. For example, your problems with not being able to run programs from the command line even though they're installed hardly ever happens on unix, because everything goes in /usr/bin or /usr/local/bin. However, I'm not sure why you had so much trouble compiling it even after installing the recommended version of VS, seems to me it should have been smoother if you were just trying to do a standard build. You would have to ask someone with more Windows knowledge than me. What I can say is that I think you have a better chance of using tcc as a drop-in replacement for gcc on linux than you do of plugging it into the VS build system.
I'm quite capable of compiling the files one by one provided I knew what they were!
As has been said, figuring out which files to compile is the least hard part -- it's coming up with the right config settings for your platform that makes the build system so complicated. -- Greg -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
