From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EC14BB81 for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2005 14:41:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j8MCfXTd000481 for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2005 14:41:34 +0200 Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA03233 for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2005 14:41:33 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [128.93.11.95] (estephe.inria.fr [128.93.11.95]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j8MCfV9t000472 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 22 Sep 2005 14:41:31 +0200 Message-ID: <4332A67A.8010907@inria.fr> Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 14:41:30 +0200 From: Xavier Leroy User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050322) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mikkelfj@gmail.com Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: Ocaml Win64 build? References: In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.90.0.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 4332A67D.003 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 4332A67B.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 caml-list:01 caml-list:01 ocaml:01 compiler:01 dlls:01 syntax:01 msdn:01 mingw:01 cygwin:01 binaries:01 binaries:01 assembler:02 assembler:02 hints:03 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.3 [ The question was asked on caml-list a while ago, and I forgot to reply there, so this is Cc: to caml-list ] > Do you have any plans to release Ocaml in an x86_64 bit version for Windows? > Or a 32-bit version that can also generate 64-bit binaries? In fact, > this would be preferable to having a 64-bit version that cannot > generate 32-bit binaries. This is on my "to do" list. This port will generate 64-bit binaries only, but of course the 32-bit Windows port will still be there for those who need to generate 32-bit binaries. At this point, the main difficulty in this port is to set up a Win64 development machine. There are no Win64 machines in my vicinity, and given the way purchase orders work at INRIA, it's unlikely there will be one before March 2006. Also, I could use recommendations and experience return about 64-bit Windows development tools. What does Microsoft provides, preferably for free? (What is needed: a C compiler, a linker, an assembler, and import libraries for standard Windows DLLs.) Where is the reference manual for the assembler syntax? (As usual, I couldn't find any complete description in MSDN.) Any hints on when x86-64 versions of Mingw and Cygwin will be available? Feel free to reply privately, as this isn't very topical for caml-list. Regards, - Xavier Leroy