On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 23:33:06 -0400, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
On 10/29/2014 4:05 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
On 29 October 2014 15:31, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
You can use Express editions of Visual Studio.
IIUC, the express edition compilers are 32-bit only, and what you
On 10/30/2014 8:59 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 23:33:06 -0400, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
The devguide needs to be kept up to date. If you open a tracker issue,
put me as nosy to review and commit.
The devguide is about building python itself. Paul is talking
/28/2014 20:59
To: Tony Kelmanmailto:kel...@berkeley.edu
Cc: python-dev@python.orgmailto:python-dev@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Status of C compilers for Python on Windows
Tony Kelman writes:
No, just hearing the words come out of my mouth they sound a little
nuts. Maybe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/28/2014 11:59 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
most developers on Windows do have access to Microsoft tool
I assume you mean python-dev folks who work on Windows: it is certainly
not true for the vast majority of develoeprs who use Python on
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 10:22:14 -0400, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
On 10/28/2014 11:59 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
most developers on Windows do have access to Microsoft tool
I assume you mean python-dev folks who work on Windows: it is certainly
not true for the vast
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 10:31:50 -0400
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 10:22:14 -0400, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
On 10/28/2014 11:59 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
most developers on Windows do have access to Microsoft tool
I assume you
On 30 October 2014 00:46, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 10:31:50 -0400
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 10:22:14 -0400, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com
wrote:
On 10/28/2014 11:59 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
most
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/29/2014 10:31 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
If you are writing code targeted for Windows, I think you are very
likely to have an MSDN subscription of some sort if your package
includes C code. I'm sure it's not 100%, though.
My experience
(Paul Moore already covered most of this, but I'll go into a bit more
detail in a couple of areas)
On 29 October 2014 00:46, Tony Kelman kel...@berkeley.edu wrote:
Stephen J. Turnbull:
It should be evident by now that our belief is that the large majority
of Windows users is well-served by the
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 11:07:53 -0400
Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/29/2014 10:31 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
If you are writing code targeted for Windows, I think you are very
likely to have an MSDN subscription of some sort
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 01:09:45 +1000
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
Lots of folks are happy with POSIX emulation layers on Windows, as
they're OK with basically works rather than works like any other
native application. Basically works isn't sufficient for many
Python-on-Windows use
On 29 Oct 2014 14:47, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 10:31:50 -0400
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 10:22:14 -0400, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com
wrote:
On 10/28/2014 11:59 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
most
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 01:09:45 +1000, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
(Paul Moore already covered most of this, but I'll go into a bit more
detail in a couple of areas)
On 29 October 2014 00:46, Tony Kelman kel...@berkeley.edu wrote:
Stephen J. Turnbull:
It should be evident by now
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 11:07:53 -0400
Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/29/2014 10:31 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
If you are writing code targeted for Windows, I think you are very
likely to have an MSDN
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 3:25 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 01:09:45 +1000
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
Lots of folks are happy with POSIX emulation layers on Windows, as
they're OK with basically works rather than works like any other
native
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 5:17 PM, David Cournapeau courn...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 3:25 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net
wrote:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 01:09:45 +1000
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
Lots of folks are happy with POSIX emulation layers on
On Oct 29, 2014, at 11:37 AM, Steve Dower steve.do...@microsoft.com wrote:
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 11:07:53 -0400
Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/29/2014 10:31 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
If you are
On 29 October 2014 15:31, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
You can use Express editions of Visual Studio.
IIUC, the express edition compilers are 32-bit only, and what you actually
want are the SDK compilers:
https://github.com/cython/cython/wiki/64BitCythonExtensionsOnWindows
These
Stephen J. Turnbull:
the pain of using Windows is what drives me away from all of them.
Enough that you are not able to make the software you write usable on
Windows? I see your point and agree with it - I don't even like Windows
much at all, but supporting it is important for plenty of
This sounds like something good for packaging.python.org
On Oct 29, 2014, at 4:05 PM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 October 2014 15:31, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
You can use Express editions of Visual Studio.
IIUC, the express edition compilers are 32-bit only,
On 29 October 2014 20:26, Donald Stufft don...@stufft.io wrote:
This sounds like something good for packaging.python.org
Yeah, I wondered about that. I'll work up a patch for that. But the
more I think about it, it really is trivial:
- For non-free MSVC, install the appropriate version, and
On Oct 29, 2014, at 6:09 PM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 October 2014 20:26, Donald Stufft don...@stufft.io wrote:
This sounds like something good for packaging.python.org
Yeah, I wondered about that. I'll work up a patch for that. But the
more I think about it, it really
On 10/29/2014 03:09 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
On 29 October 2014 20:26, Donald Stufft don...@stufft.io wrote:
This sounds like something good for packaging.python.org
Yeah, I wondered about that. I'll work up a patch for that. But the
more I think about it, it really is trivial:
I am reminded
On 29 October 2014 22:19, Ethan Furman et...@stoneleaf.us wrote:
Yeah, I wondered about that. I'll work up a patch for that. But the
more I think about it, it really is trivial:
I am reminded of an interview question I was once asked which was prefaced
with: Here's an easy one...
My reply
On 10/29/2014 03:46 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
On 29 October 2014 22:19, Ethan Furman et...@stoneleaf.us wrote:
- where one should be at when one starts the compile process
I don't understand this. It's just pip wheel foo to build a wheel
for foo (which will be downloaded), or pip wheel . or
On Oct 29, 2014, at 7:02 PM, Ethan Furman et...@stoneleaf.us wrote:
On 10/29/2014 03:46 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
On 29 October 2014 22:19, Ethan Furman et...@stoneleaf.us wrote:
- where one should be at when one starts the compile process
I don't understand this. It's just pip wheel foo
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 October 2014 22:19, Ethan Furman et...@stoneleaf.us wrote:
Yeah, I wondered about that. I'll work up a patch for that. But the
more I think about it, it really is trivial:
I am reminded of an interview question I
On 29 October 2014 23:22, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
Yeah, I know what you mean. My take on this is that I agree it's not
easy if you don't know and can't get access to the information, but if
you can, there's very little to it.
That's great, but yeah. In case it helps as a data
On 29 October 2014 23:49, Steve Dower steve.do...@microsoft.com wrote:
For the paid versions, I'm going to assume that anyone who paid for a
compiler and doesn't know where their copy is, probably can't be
helped ;-)
You could link to visualstudio.com for the trial versions, and maybe to a
Mooremailto:p.f.mo...@gmail.com
Sent: 10/29/2014 15:48
To: Ethan Furmanmailto:et...@stoneleaf.us
Cc: Python Devmailto:python-dev@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Status of C compilers for Python on Windows
On 29 October 2014 22:19, Ethan Furman et...@stoneleaf.us wrote:
Yeah, I wondered about
On 10/29/2014 4:05 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
On 29 October 2014 15:31, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
You can use Express editions of Visual Studio.
IIUC, the express edition compilers are 32-bit only, and what you actually
want are the SDK compilers:
On 10/29/2014 11:37 AM, Steve Dower wrote:
My ideal target (Utopia refined to be achievable) is for python-dev
to handle the Python binaries themselves (already done) and to make
them easy to bundle with applications/etc (I'm working on this for
3.5), and for PyPI to include pre-built wheels
Stephen J. Turnbull:
Python is open source. Nobody is objecting to somebody else doing
this.[1] The problem here is simply that some somebody elses are
trying to throw future work over the wall into python-dev space.
If that's how it's seen at this point, then it sounds like the logical
Tony Kelman writes:
If potential contributors have a desire to get it working in the
first place, then they will also be invested in helping keep it
working on an ongoing basis.
Sure -- as long as it works for them, though, such potential
contributors don't necessarily care if it works for
Stephen J. Turnbull:
Sure -- as long as it works for them, though, such potential
contributors don't necessarily care if it works for anybody else. My
experience (in other projects) is that allowing that level of
commitment to be sufficient for inclusion in the maintained code base
frequently
On 28 October 2014 14:46, Tony Kelman kel...@berkeley.edu wrote:
Patches should be done well and accompanied with proper documentation
so new functionality is fully reproducible. If that's what's holding
up review, comments in the bug threads indicating as much would be
helpful.
Typically
On 10/28/2014 6:45 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
because it's a fork, it's a different name
I think this is an important point, and first brought to this discussion
here. A fork is _not_ called Python, but something else... but if it is
kept extremely compatible and up-to-date in the hopes of
Tony Kelman writes:
No, just hearing the words come out of my mouth they sound a little
nuts. Maybe not, there are after all half a dozen or more
incompatible alternate Python implementations floating around. I
think most of them started as from-scratch rewrites rather than
source
On 27 October 2014 09:44, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
I view it as critical (because availability of binaries is *already*
enough of a problem in the Windows world, without making it worse)
that we avoid this sort of fragmentation. I'm not seeing an
acknowledgement from the mingw
On 27 October 2014 09:37, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 26 October 2014 23:24, Tony Kelman kel...@berkeley.edu wrote:
I want, and in many places *need*, an all-MinGW stack.
OK, I'm willing to accept that statement. But I don't understand it,
and I don't think you've explained why
On 27 October 2014 12:30, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
OK, I'm willing to accept that statement. But I don't understand it,
and I don't think you've explained why you *need* your CPython
interpreter to be compiled with mingw (as opposed to a number of other
things you might need
On 26 October 2014 01:05, Ray Donnelly mingw.andr...@gmail.com wrote:
Download and run:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/msys2/files/Base/x86_64/msys2-x86_64-20141003.exe/download
Sending this offline because I really don't want to start up another
extended debate, but is there a version of this
Please ignore this. I hit the wrong button.
On 27 October 2014 14:18, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 26 October 2014 01:05, Ray Donnelly mingw.andr...@gmail.com wrote:
Download and run:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/msys2/files/Base/x86_64/msys2-x86_64-20141003.exe/download
On 26 October 2014 23:44, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 26 October 2014 23:11, Ray Donnelly mingw.andr...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't know where this ABI compatible thing came into being;
Simple. If a mingw-built CPython doesn't work with the same extensions
as a MSVC-built CPython,
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 10:48 AM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
The bad news is that the support added to the old 32-bit mingw to
support linking to alternative C runtime libraries (specifically
-lmsvcr100) has bitrotted, and no longer functions correctly in
mingw-w64. As a result, not
On 27 October 2014 18:47, Case Van Horsen cas...@gmail.com wrote:
I've managed to build gmpy2 (which requires GMP, MPFR, and MPC
libraries) using msys2. I've detailed the steps (hacking) at:
https://code.google.com/p/gmpy/source/browse/trunk/msys2_build.txt
Thanks for this. I don't have the
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 11:52 PM, mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
Zitat von Tony Kelman kel...@berkeley.edu:
A maintainer has volunteered. Others will help. Can any core developers
please begin reviewing some of his patches?
Unfortunately, every attempt to review these patches has failed for
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 5:48 PM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 26 October 2014 23:44, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 26 October 2014 23:11, Ray Donnelly mingw.andr...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't know where this ABI compatible thing came into being;
Simple. If a mingw-built
Nick Coghlan wrote:
That assumption will allow MinGW-w64 to link with the appropriate
MSVCRT versions for extention building without anything breaking.
If that works, then the same technique should allow CPython
itself to be built in a VS-compatible way with mingw,
shouldn't it?
Those
On 27 October 2014 20:45, Greg Ewing greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz wrote:
Nick Coghlan wrote:
That assumption will allow MinGW-w64 to link with the appropriate
MSVCRT versions for extention building without anything breaking.
If that works, then the same technique should allow CPython
itself
Greg Ewing wrote:
Nick Coghlan wrote:
That assumption will allow MinGW-w64 to link with the appropriate
MSVCRT versions for extention building without anything breaking.
If that works, then the same technique should allow CPython itself to be built
in a VS-compatible way with mingw,
Paul Moore wrote:
On 27 October 2014 20:45, Greg Ewing greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz wrote:
Nick Coghlan wrote:
That assumption will allow MinGW-w64 to link with the appropriate
MSVCRT versions for extention building without anything breaking.
If that works, then the same technique should
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 8:54 PM, Steve Dower steve.do...@microsoft.com wrote:
Greg Ewing wrote:
Nick Coghlan wrote:
That assumption will allow MinGW-w64 to link with the appropriate
MSVCRT versions for extention building without anything breaking.
If that works, then the same technique
On 27 October 2014 21:19, Steve Dower steve.do...@microsoft.com wrote:
No, we've been trying to establish whether the patches to build with mingw
were
intended to produce such a compatible build. It's not clear, but so far it
seems
that apparently that is *not* the intent (and worse,
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
Not really, to be honest. I still don't understand why anyone not
directly involved in CPython development would need to build their own
Python executable on Windows.
Late Python bugfix releases are source-only, so if you
R. David Murray writes:
On Sun, 26 Oct 2014 00:19:44 +0200, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net
wrote:
My point is that your Windows build would not have the same behaviour
as a MSVC-produced Windows build, and so testing it with it would not
certify that your code would actually be
Ray Donnelly wrote:
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 11:44 PM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 25 October 2014 23:22, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 9:19 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
My point is that your Windows build would not have the same
Thanks all for the responses. Clearly this is a subject about which
people feel strongly, so that's good at least. David Murray's guidance
in particular points to the most likely path to get improvements to
really happen.
Steve Dower:
Building CPython for Windows is not something that needs
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Tony Kelman kel...@berkeley.edu wrote:
Thanks all for the responses. Clearly this is a subject about which
people feel strongly, so that's good at least. David Murray's guidance
in particular points to the most likely path to get improvements to
really happen.
On Sun, 26 Oct 2014 06:12:45 -0700, Tony Kelman kel...@berkeley.edu wrote:
Steve Dower:
Building CPython for Windows is not something that needs solving.
Not in your opinion, but numerous packagers of MinGW-based native or
cross-compiled package sets would love to include Python. The fact
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Ray Donnelly mingw.andr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Tony Kelman kel...@berkeley.edu wrote:
Thanks all for the responses. Clearly this is a subject about which
people feel strongly, so that's good at least. David Murray's guidance
in
If this includes (or would likely include) a significant portion of the
Scientific Computing community, I would think that would be a compelling
use case.
I can't speak for any of the scientific computing community besides myself,
but my thoughts: much of the development, as you know, happens
On 26 October 2014 13:12, Tony Kelman kel...@berkeley.edu wrote:
Only cross-compilation and the build system in the above list are relevant
to CPython, but I hope I have convinced you, Paul Moore, etc. that there are
real reasons for some groups of users and developers to prefer MinGW-w64
over
On 26 October 2014 17:59, Tony Kelman kel...@berkeley.edu wrote:
Ensuring compatibility with CPython's
chosen msvcrt has made that work even more difficult for them.
Ensuring compatibility with CPython's msvcrt is mandatory unless you
want to create a split in the community over which
On 26 October 2014 14:28, Ray Donnelly mingw.andr...@gmail.com wrote:
I like this idea. To reduce the workload, we should probably pick
Python3 (at least initially)?
Aren't the existing patches on the tracker already for Python 3.5+?
They should be, as that's the only version that's likely to
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 10:41 PM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 26 October 2014 13:12, Tony Kelman kel...@berkeley.edu wrote:
Only cross-compilation and the build system in the above list are relevant
to CPython, but I hope I have convinced you, Paul Moore, etc. that there are
real
Not really, to be honest. I still don't understand why anyone not
directly involved in CPython development would need to build their own
Python executable on Windows. Can you explain a single specific
situation where installing and using the python.org executable is not
possible
I want, and in
On 26 October 2014 23:24, Tony Kelman kel...@berkeley.edu wrote:
I want, and in many places *need*, an all-MinGW stack.
OK, I'm willing to accept that statement. But I don't understand it,
and I don't think you've explained why you *need* your CPython
interpreter to be compiled with mingw (as
On 26 October 2014 23:11, Ray Donnelly mingw.andr...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't know where this ABI compatible thing came into being;
Simple. If a mingw-built CPython doesn't work with the same extensions
as a MSVC-built CPython, then the community gets fragmented (because
you can only use the
Zitat von Tony Kelman kel...@berkeley.edu:
A maintainer has volunteered. Others will help. Can any core developers
please begin reviewing some of his patches?
Unfortunately, every attempt to review these patches has failed for me,
every time. In the last iteration of an attempt to add
I'm several weeks late to this discussion, but I'm glad to see that it
happened. I'm not a Python developer, and barely a user, but I have several
years of daily experience compiling complicated scientific software cross-
platform, particularly with MinGW-w64 for Windows. The Python community,
Windows Phone
From: Tony Kelmanmailto:kel...@berkeley.edu
Sent: 10/25/2014 9:06
To: python-dev@python.orgmailto:python-dev@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Status of C compilers for Python on Windows
I'm several weeks late to this discussion, but I'm glad
On Sat, 25 Oct 2014 05:45:24 -0700, Tony Kelman kel...@berkeley.edu wrote:
As a developer of a (compiled) open-source library or application, wouldn't
you love to be able to build binaries on Linux for Windows? With some work
and build system patches, you can. For many projects it's a simple
Ray Donnelly wrote:
What is it that you
are afraid of if CPython can be compiled out of the box using
mingw/MinGW-w64? Why are you fighting so hard against having option.
I'm afraid of users having numpy crash because they're using an MSVC CPython
instead of a mingw CPython. I'm afraid of
: 10/25/2014 9:06
To: python-dev@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Status of C compilers for Python on Windows
I'm several weeks late to this discussion, but I'm glad to see that it
happened. I'm not a Python developer, and barely a user, but I have several
years of daily experience
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 7:50 AM, Steve Dower steve.do...@microsoft.com wrote:
Ray Donnelly wrote:
What is it that you
are afraid of if CPython can be compiled out of the box using
mingw/MinGW-w64? Why are you fighting so hard against having option.
I'm afraid of users having numpy crash
On Sun, 26 Oct 2014 08:11:39 +1100
Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
It might fragment the community to have multiple different binary
distributions. But it ought to be possible for any person/organization
to say We're going to make our own build of Python, with these
extension modules,
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 8:47 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
And how do you know that it would have worked with MSVC if you only use
MinGW?
If you want to ensure compatibility with MSVC, you must build with MSVC.
There's no working around that.
Precisely. If you build with
On Sat, 25 Oct 2014 21:10:23 +0100
Ray Donnelly mingw.andr...@gmail.com wrote:
This is the second time you've used the vacuous culture on Windows
argument, now with an added appeal to (vague) authority.
[...]
Why are you fighting so hard against having option.
If CPython wants to truly call
On Sun, 26 Oct 2014 08:53:29 +1100
Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 8:47 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
And how do you know that it would have worked with MSVC if you only use
MinGW?
If you want to ensure compatibility with MSVC, you must build
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 10:52 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Sat, 25 Oct 2014 21:10:23 +0100
Ray Donnelly mingw.andr...@gmail.com wrote:
This is the second time you've used the vacuous culture on Windows
argument, now with an added appeal to (vague) authority.
[...]
Why
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
How do you know this isn't a problem, since you haven't *tested* with
MSVC?
Why on Earth would you want to test your PEP work with an unsupported
Windows compiler and runtime, rather than with the officially supported
On Sun, 26 Oct 2014 09:06:36 +1100
Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
How do you know this isn't a problem, since you haven't *tested* with
MSVC?
Why on Earth would you want to test your PEP work with an
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 9:19 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
My point is that your Windows build would not have the same behaviour
as a MSVC-produced Windows build, and so testing it with it would not
certify that your code would actually be compatible with genuine
MSVC builds of
On Sat, 25 Oct 2014 21:10:23 +0100, Ray Donnelly mingw.andr...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 6:13 PM, Steve Dower steve.do...@microsoft.com
wrote:
(Apologies for the short reply, posting from my phone.)
MSVC can continue
to be the default compiler used for Python on Windows,
On 10/25/2014 5:11 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
It might fragment the community to have multiple different binary
distributions. But it ought to be possible for any person/organization
to say We're going to make our own build of Python, with these
extension modules, built with this compiler,
On 25 October 2014 21:50, Steve Dower steve.do...@microsoft.com wrote:
Ray Donnelly wrote:
What is it that you
are afraid of if CPython can be compiled out of the box using
mingw/MinGW-w64? Why are you fighting so hard against having option.
I'm afraid of users having numpy crash because
On Sun, 26 Oct 2014 09:22:18 +1100
Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 9:19 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
My point is that your Windows build would not have the same behaviour
as a MSVC-produced Windows build, and so testing it with it would not
On 25 October 2014 23:22, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 9:19 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
My point is that your Windows build would not have the same behaviour
as a MSVC-produced Windows build, and so testing it with it would not
certify that
On Sun, 26 Oct 2014 00:19:44 +0200, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Sun, 26 Oct 2014 09:06:36 +1100
Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
How do you know this isn't a problem, since you haven't *tested*
On Sat, 25 Oct 2014 19:24:38 -0400
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
I know I for one do not generally test patches on Windows because I
haven't taken the time to learn how to build CPython on it. Sure, I
could test pure python changes by applying patches to an installed
Python,
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Ray Donnelly mingw.andr...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 6:13 PM, Steve Dower steve.do...@microsoft.com
wrote:
Building CPython for Windows is not something that needs solving. The
culture on Windows is to redistribute binaries, not source, and
On 26/10/2014 00:24, R. David Murray wrote:
On Sun, 26 Oct 2014 00:19:44 +0200, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Sun, 26 Oct 2014 09:06:36 +1100
Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
How do you know this
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 12:30 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Sat, 25 Oct 2014 19:24:38 -0400
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
I know I for one do not generally test patches on Windows because I
haven't taken the time to learn how to build CPython on it. Sure, I
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 11:44 PM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 25 October 2014 23:22, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 9:19 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
My point is that your Windows build would not have the same behaviour
as a
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 1:45 AM, Steve Dower steve.do...@microsoft.com wrote:
Ray Donnelly wrote:
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 11:44 PM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 25 October 2014 23:22, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 9:19 AM, Antoine Pitrou
Ray Donnelly wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 1:45 AM, Steve Dower steve.do...@microsoft.com
wrote:
Ray Donnelly wrote:
Also, where are the publicly accessible specifications and other technical
descriptions that MinGW-w64 would need to implement strong binary
compatibility with MSVC? As a
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 7:05 PM, Ray Donnelly mingw.andr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 12:30 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Sat, 25 Oct 2014 19:24:38 -0400
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
I know I for one do not generally test patches on Windows
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 6:24 PM, R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
Note: it can be made even less compelling by making it a lot easier to
build CPython on Windows without having an MSVC license (which I think
means not using the GUI, for which I say *yay* :). I think Zach Ware
has
Victor Stinner wrote:
Hi,
[SKIP]
=== MinGW
Some people tried to compile Python. See for example:
https://bitbucket.org/puqing/python-mingw
We even got some patches:
http://bugs.python.org/issue3871 (rejected)
[SNIP]
As all in one patch it was rejected , but you could find splits:
17605 -
1 - 100 of 142 matches
Mail list logo
