What would MinGW buy us over straight MSVC? Since MinGW ultimately uses the
MSVC runtime, doesn't this just mean an extrat layer of overhead? Plus we
would be limited to whatever api support MinGW happenned to pass through.

Curt

-----Original Message-----
From: Nat Pryce [mailto:nat.pryce / b13media.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 5:23 PM
To: ruby-talk ML
Subject: [ruby-talk:23891] Re: New RubyGarden Poll: Windows support


Please! Don't vote for what you think will win.  Vote for what you actually
want or what you think is the best option.

The MinGW and MSVC options should have the same effect.  That is, they
should be compatible at the source and binary level.  MinGW lets gcc use the
MSVC C runtime library and calling conventions.  However, in my experience,
MSVC usually has support for new Microsoft APIs months before any other
compilers, so it is important to be able to build Ruby extensions with MSVC
even if the main interpreter is built with MinGW.

However, although I voted for MSVC, my vote was not counted by the poll!

Cheers,
            Nat.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Armstrong" <matt+dated+1007079423.bfe4aa / lickey.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ruby
To: "ruby-talk ML" <ruby-talk / ruby-lang.org>; <undisclosed-recipients: ;>
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 12:35 AM
Subject: [ruby-talk:23884] Re: New RubyGarden Poll: Windows support


> Dave Thomas <Dave / PragmaticProgrammer.com> writes:
>
> > In order to settle the Windows question once and for all (or at least
> > for the next 4 months), the new RubyGarden polls asks
> >
> >
> >      Ruby under Windows should be:
> >
> >          A native MSVC application
> >          Built using MinGW
> >          Build using Cygwin
> >
> > Vote now at http://www.rubygarden.org/pollBooth.php?op=results&pollID=8
>
> What are the practical differences between a MSVC app and a MinGW app?
> The end result is similar, correct?
>
> I would have voted for "anything but cygwin" were it there.  Instead I
> took MinGW since it is looking to most convincingly beat the cygwin
> option.  :-)
>
>
> --
> matt
>