Could we agree to disagree and come together on improvements andclean-up?
J.Wielemaker at uva.nl
Sat May 31 10:54:18 CEST 2008
On Saturday 31 May 2008 10:25:33 Brian Gladman wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "NightStrike" <nightstrike at gmail.com>
> To: "Torbjorn Granlund" <tg at swox.com>
> Cc: <xkey at yahoo.com>; <gmp-discuss at swox.com>
> Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2008 1:38 AM
> Subject: Re: Could we agree to disagree and come together on improvements
> > On 5/30/08, Torbjorn Granlund <tg at swox.com> wrote:
> >> Why do people insist on being so abstract on GMP improvements matters?
> > Here's a specific -- Win64
> > It is stagnating our development on mingw-w64.sf.net, and is holding
> > up the entire gcc toolchain for that target platform.
> You haave my strong support for this, as there is a critical need for a
> high quality alternative to the Microsoft development tools for 64-bit
> applications on Windows.
I second that. I ported SWI-Prolog to Win64 early 2007. It could only be
done after a commercial user donated me a copy of Visual Studio 2008
professional, and still it is crappy due to a broken port of GMP. Thanks
to Brian there at least a somewhat working version :-) Ok. it appears
the situation has improved a bit and I now should be able to assemple a
version with proper GMP support. I hope that if I have time to look into
this again I can move the entire toolchain to build SWI-Prolog on Win32
and Win64 to MinGW, both to get at a more uniform build platform and to
liberate users and developers from MSVC.
AFAIK, the most important thing realising this is replacing 'long' by
int/size_t/intptr_t, as appropriate. I had to go through that myself for
SWI-Prolog. Ok, it is a nightmare and only needed to support Win64 but
in the end the code gets clearer.
More information about the gmp-discuss