On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Diego Iastrubni <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 5:35 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Who cares about C++ features? gcc 4.7 is a better compiler than MSVC2010, >> > so unless Microsoft has gotten off their collective behinds with 2012 it's >> > likely >> > that gcc 4.7 is going to be a better compiler than that, too. The problem >> > is with >> > MinGW's standard libraries, not with the compiler. >> >> Define 'better' . I'm right now having the joy to more or less continuously >> compile Qt 5 with different MinGW variants, and it's really, really, dog >> slow. >> >> (MSVC is slow too, compared to gcc on Linux. But MinGW gcc takes slowness >> really to the next level...) >> >> who is aware that this is now pretty off topic ... >> > Actually... I do not believe this is completely of topic. You claim > that mingw is slow and you are *very* against it (you spoken about it > on several threads). I assume that your opinion is very valid - since > this is what you do on a daily basis. > > What can you recommend for hobbiest on win32? clang? Other > "free=no-cost" compiler available on windows that can compile > Qt4/5+QtCreator+my_cool_qt_app ?
I assume the recommendation would be MSVC Express, which is free-as-in-beer but is lacking some features. /s/ Adam _______________________________________________ Qt-creator mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator
