From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6069ABBAF for ; Tue, 5 May 2009 17:22:11 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AkUBAHn2/0lRZ90vlGdsb2JhbACOTogoAQEBAQkLCAkRA7oLhAEF X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,431,1233529200"; d="scan'208";a="28785914" Received: from mtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.47]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 05 May 2009 17:22:11 +0200 Received: from aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.35]) by mtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (InterMail vM.7.08.04.00 201-2186-134-20080326) with ESMTP id <20090505152210.QVRT2989.mtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com>; Tue, 5 May 2009 16:22:10 +0100 Received: from romulus.metastack.com ([81.102.132.77]) by aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (InterMail vG.2.02.00.01 201-2161-120-102-20060912) with ESMTP id <20090505152210.TMYT2093.aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@romulus.metastack.com>; Tue, 5 May 2009 16:22:10 +0100 Received: from Tenor ([172.16.0.9]) (authenticated bits=0) by romulus.metastack.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id n45FM6AN017166 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 5 May 2009 16:22:07 +0100 From: "David Allsopp" To: "'Sylvain Le Gall'" , References: <90823c940904281236x61204451nac149ee15b5df73a@mail.gmail.com> <4A0005C8.8010609@inria.fr> <90823c940905050241y11f012e5xee8316e3e4337ff9@mail.gmail.com> <4A004A05.6040204@lexifi.com> In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: [Caml-list] Re: Ocamlopt code generator question Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 16:21:46 +0100 Organization: MetaStack Solutions Ltd. Message-ID: <004e01c9cd95$34bad350$9e3079f0$@com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 thread-index: AcnNkhSFU82ge3fiQ/eAgLURl0j7lgAAdtHg Content-Language: en-gb X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.65 on 81.102.132.77 X-Cloudmark-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=V5ouJCdBjCgA:10 a=iZwDA84u1S8A:10 a=MzGPuy5Bc60vHkEoMNUA:9 a=YiDcwDN5MvTEr1Lk8k4A:7 a=eiKht81K5kNxALFxZarvfzGEVZgA:4 X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocamlopt:01 mingw:01 mingw:01 cygwin:01 ocaml:01 compiler:01 knocking:98 wrote:01 unix:01 msvc:01 msvc:01 caml-list:01 external:03 debian:04 inria:06 Sylvain Le Gall wrote: > Maybe this point can be discussed. I think 3 ports for windows is a bit > too much... I don't know Dimitry point of view, but maybe INRIA can > just consider MSVC (or mingw). If this is a way to free INRIA resources, it > is a good option. There are actually 4 Windows ports if you include MSVC64! I'm not sure at this stage that it's possible to reduce the number - I think you'll find that there are enough users on both sides with enough hard/impossible-to-work-around requirements (probably to do with external libraries) such that you'd never be able to decide between just MinGW or just MSVC. The Cygwin port, although obviously requiring extra work and support, is more like supporting a separate flavour of UNIX than a separate Windows port, I think. > I would like to say "go on", but SSE2 will limit OCaml to P4 on i386. > In Debian, this is the "low limit" of our build daemon. I think it is > quite dangerous not having the option of the older code generator... +1 I've still got a few quite useable Pentium 3 machines knocking around... it would seem a shame if a lack of compiler rather than OS support ever caused them to be retired. That said, the power and noise will probably be what retires them first... David