2013/11/8 Pedro <[email protected]> > jmadero wrote > > No offense at all, I encourage open conversation but I tend to see a one > > side conversation "THERE SHOULD BE A 64 BIT FLYING LIBREOFFICE THAT CAN > > BAKE ME A CAKE AND CALCULATE A QUADRILLION FORMULAS IN 0.0000001 SECONDS > > USING ALL 16 OF MY CORES!" - without the other side of the equation - > > "such a product would be incredibly costly and there are thousands of > > much more important things to get done that will benefit a lot more > > users." > > So, having a 64bit Linux version is Ok, creating a 64bit version for MacOS > (starting in LO 4.2) is Ok, but asking for a 64bit Windows build is > selfish... > > Interesting. Us Windows users should be ashamed of ourselves... > > Having 64bits binary in linux/macos is natural, as everything around is 64bit, and the toolchain is quite easy to handle. On windows, there is two issues regarding this: - 64bit software is not as common as one would expect. Some Java installation are still 32bit, which would break LibreOffice64bit instantly. - Building 64bit binary is somewhat tricky on windows; mingw64 is a way, but when you end up having dependencies that need to be built as 64bit too, and they don't build easily, it gets tedious, to say the least... assuming the code would build at all by just switching compiler target. Not sure of the current state of other "open" solutions like cygwin regarding this. And using MSVC would be more challenging than anything, as it introduce it's own set of surprise when going from 32bit build to 64bit build.
And all that just to have a 64bit binary that would only give more work and no immediate benefit... -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: [email protected] Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
