stu wrote:
> Lothar Scholz wrote:
>> RM>  -1 for MinGW RM>  +1 for VC
>> 
>> Some here
>> 
>> -1 for MingGW +1 for VC
>> 
>> VC has still a much better optimizer then gcc, if you use it with
>> care about 10% faster, which today where CPU's are not getting
>> faster as fast is still important.
> 
> 10% is a LOT! I'd like to see these numbers that proove 10%. I'd be
> sure there is a difference but 10% is ridiculous.
It wouldn't surprise me, but I'd still like to see numbers.

Optimisation is completely tangential to the current issue, anyway -
Ruby's currently (if I remember correctly) broken with -O any higher
than 2, and it's the toolchain integration that's important here.

<snip>
> Doesnt microsofts license forbid redistribution of VC Express anyway?
> 
 From the EULA:

> 12. TRANSFER TO A THIRD PARTY.  The first user of the software may
> transfer it, and this agreement, directly to a third party.  Before
> the transfer, that party must agree that this agreement applies to
> the transfer and use of the software.  The first user must uninstall
> the software before transferring it separately from the device.  The
> first user may not retain any copies.

That'd be a no.  That being said, if there's already a dialogue open 
with Microsoft, it *might* be possible to talk them into allowing a 
distribution of *only* the command-line tools Ruby needs, and not the 
whole IDE kit and kaboodle.  *Might*.

-- 
Alex