[Python-Dev] C99 (original) (raw)
tritium-list at sdamon.com tritium-list at sdamon.com
Tue Jun 7 16:10:28 EDT 2016
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] C99
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] C99
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Doesn't Cygwin build against the posix abstraction layer? Wouldn't a python built as such operate as though it was on a unix of some sort? It has been quite a while since I messed with Cygwin - if it hasn't changed, it's not really an option, especially when we have native windows builds now. It would be too much of a downgrade in experience and performance.
-----Original Message----- From: Python-Dev [mailto:python-dev-bounces+tritium-_ _list=sdamon.com at python.org] On Behalf Of Sturla Molden Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2016 3:37 PM To: python-dev at python.org Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] C99
Victor Stinner <victor.stinner at gmail.com> wrote: > Is it worth to support a compiler that in 2016 doesn't support the C > standard released in 1999, 17 years ago? MSVC only supports C99 when its needed for C++11 or some MS extension to C. Is it worth supporting MSVC? If not, we have Intel C, Clang and Cygwin GCC are the viable options we have on Windows (and perhaps Embarcadero, but I haven't used C++ builder for a very long time). Even MinGW does not fully support C99, because it depends on Microsoft's CRT. If we think MSVC and MinGW are worth supporting, we cannot just use C99 indiscriminantly.
Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev at python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/tritium- list%40sdamon.com
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] C99
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] C99
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]