From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <adrien@notk.org>
X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104])
	by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A67DD7EEB9
	for <caml-list@sympa.inria.fr>; Mon, 26 Oct 2015 20:04:03 +0100 (CET)
IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:U1H5yBIQWCI3Qf4LtNmcpTZWNBhigK39O0sv0rFitYgUIvrxwZ3uMQTl6Ol3ixeRBMOAu68C0rOd6vmwEUU7or+/81k6OKRWUBEEjchE1ycBO+WiTXPBEfjxciYhF95DXlI2t1uyMExSBdqsLwaK+i760zceF13FOBZvIaytQ8iJ35nxjrn5osSDKyxzxxODIppKZC2sqgvQssREyaBDEY0WjiXzn31TZu5NznlpL1/A1zz158O34YIxu38I46Fp34d6XK77Z6U1S6BDRHRjajhtpZ6jiR6WBzCI63QASGIO1lJtAgPF5Rz+FN+ltyrxtuNw3G+BOsD5UaozQRyj6btmTFnjjyJRZBAj92SCo8Bqja9d6DSoqxFli9rdbJuUOfxWeKTBfpUdX2UXDZUZbDBIHo7pN9hHNOEGJ+sN6tCl/1Y=
Authentication-Results: mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; spf=None smtp.pra=adrien@notk.org; spf=PermError smtp.mailfrom=adrien@notk.org; spf=None smtp.helo=postmaster@nautica.notk.org
Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  adrien@notk.org) identity=pra; client-ip=91.121.71.147;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="adrien@notk.org"; x-sender="adrien@notk.org";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: PermError (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: cannot
  correctly interpret sender authenticity information from
  domain of adrien@notk.org) identity=mailfrom;
  client-ip=91.121.71.147;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="adrien@notk.org"; x-sender="adrien@notk.org";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1"
Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  postmaster@nautica.notk.org) identity=helo;
  client-ip=91.121.71.147;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="adrien@notk.org";
  x-sender="postmaster@nautica.notk.org";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0ABAgB6eC5W/5NHeVtegzbACAENgVqGEwoCgTc4FAEBAQEBAQEBgQmCK4IIAQEEI1YQCxIGAgIFDAcOAgIPBRgdARMniCCzT5IRAQEIAQEBAR+BIoVVhH6FDQcKgl8xgRQFljaNGghbkGWKbx8BAUKCER2BVj2HTAEBAQ
X-IPAS-Result: A0ABAgB6eC5W/5NHeVtegzbACAENgVqGEwoCgTc4FAEBAQEBAQEBgQmCK4IIAQEEI1YQCxIGAgIFDAcOAgIPBRgdARMniCCzT5IRAQEIAQEBAR+BIoVVhH6FDQcKgl8xgRQFljaNGghbkGWKbx8BAUKCER2BVj2HTAEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,201,1444687200"; 
   d="scan'208";a="151806371"
Received: from nautica.notk.org ([91.121.71.147])
  by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 26 Oct 2015 20:04:02 +0100
Received: by nautica.notk.org (Postfix, from userid 1003)
	id 10438C03D; Mon, 26 Oct 2015 20:04:02 +0100 (CET)
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 20:04:02 +0100
From: Adrien Nader <adrien@notk.org>
To: "Soegtrop, Michael" <michael.soegtrop@intel.com>
Cc: Gerd Stolpmann <info@gerd-stolpmann.de>,
	"caml-list@inria.fr" <caml-list@inria.fr>
Message-ID: <20151026190402.GA26641@notk.org>
References: <0F7D3B1B3C4B894D824F5B822E3E5A172CE32E38@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <562A5C92.50206@inria.fr>
 <0F7D3B1B3C4B894D824F5B822E3E5A172CE3315A@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <1445685398.4567.70.camel@e130.lan.sumadev.de>
 <0F7D3B1B3C4B894D824F5B822E3E5A172CE335B7@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <0F7D3B1B3C4B894D824F5B822E3E5A172CE335B7@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Effect of Windows LLP64 architecture on 64 bit
 MingW OCaml

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015, Soegtrop, Michael wrote:
> > The Makefile.nt system exists mainly for the MSVC build. I also think that the
> > mingw build would be better done with the Makefiles.
> 
> I see. I guess an Ocaml build is very special, but did the Ocaml community ever consider cmake or bakefiles? The main advantage, besides supplying cross platform builds in a maintainable way, is that they also supply IDE project files, which makes it more comfortable to work on Ocaml itself, especially libraries.

There are several things to take into account here:
- history
- migration cost
- availability of something in either cmake or bmake that fits the needs
  of OCaml and of the compiler (I am fairly sure there aren't any, at
  least in cmake)
- cost of cleaning 20 years of growth (this applies to anything related
  to this subject since it is often difficult to understand the
  differences between .nt and non .nt files)

-- 
Adrien Nader