caml-list - the Caml user's mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Xavier Leroy <xavier.leroy@inria.fr>
To: Jean-Marc Eber <jeanmarc.eber@lexifi.com>
Cc: caml-list@inria.fr, Dmitry Bely <dbely@mail.ru>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Ocaml 3.03 alpha MinGW port
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 12:03:02 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20011126120302.A1982@pauillac.inria.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <007301c17659$0ae17840$060000c0@N7YYB>; from jeanmarc.eber@lexifi.com on Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 09:28:46AM +0100

> I'm really not a specialist about this topic, but have now
> (or in a near future) to choose between possible
> Windows "technologies" (Visual C, Cygwin, MinGW) for
> an OCaml program (only a console mode stuff in my case).
> 
> Could anybody explain to me why a MinGW isn't *always*
> preferable to a Cygwin one (use of the same compiler, GCC,
> MinGW being more "direct" Windows without an indirection
> layer, not speaking about licensing problems, etc....).

The full Cygwin provides a rather complete Unix emulation, hence the
OCaml Cygwin port supports the debugger, all of the Unix module, and
(I believe) the LablGTK GUI -- all things that are missing in the
OCaml MinGW port, if I remember correctly.

> I understand well that the Caml Team wants probably to
> maintain a MS C version of the OCaml implementation,
> but wanted to ask the Team if they have some ideas about
> the future of Cygwin/MinGW ports. Isn't a MinGW port, in
> the medium term, preferable to a Cygwin one ? Or do I
> miss a point ?

The situation is quite simple, really:

- We can't support three different Windows port of OCaml; the current
  two are already too much.

- Every time I mention this fact on this list, we get replies of the form
    "I can't live without the Visual C based port of OCaml --
     I'm doing real industrial work, and everything gcc-related is
     just amateur work"
  OR
    "I got a Windows machine because that's the company policy,
     but I really do all my work within the Cygwin environment and
     don't want to hear about anything else".

Draw your own conclusions...

- Xavier Leroy
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr


  reply	other threads:[~2001-11-26 11:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-11-26  8:28 Jean-Marc Eber
2001-11-26 11:03 ` Xavier Leroy [this message]
2001-11-26 13:34   ` Dmitry Bely
2001-11-26 15:37 ` [Caml-list] " Jean Martos
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-09-24 23:40 [Caml-list] Initial port of ocaml for mingw (long) art
2001-10-17 19:07 ` [Caml-list] Ocaml 3.03 alpha MinGW port Dmitry Bely
2001-10-22  1:46   ` Masakazu Fukuzawa
2001-10-22 14:56     ` Dmitry Bely
2001-10-22 16:18       ` Masakazu Fukuzawa

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20011126120302.A1982@pauillac.inria.fr \
    --to=xavier.leroy@inria.fr \
    --cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
    --cc=dbely@mail.ru \
    --cc=jeanmarc.eber@lexifi.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).