Re: Voting begins on removing OpenWatcom support
- Posted by ne1uno Oct 28, 2012
- 3348 views
MinGW is one installer, like Watcom.
The MinGW installer is not like Watcom. It's a small executable that contains none of the compiler's files. When run, it goes to the web to obtain files that are missing or need to be updated, [...]
I never used the oe/ow installer. I was under the impression it was an online installer. maybe it just downloads their offline installer? can someone say exactly how long it takes vrs minGW?
I installed minGW on a netbook using the online installer a few months ago at a wi-fi hot spot and it took more than a few minutes, so it probably won't be fun on a dialup. the surprize download/install could be a dealbreaker for some.
there are 3rd party offline installer for minGW or forked gcc. they are under 20meg, with varying degrees of nice. the minGW download page on sourceforge doesn't make it easy to find the many files/version checks you need to download and install to get a working system. probably most people use the minGW online installer now.
nuwen.net has had 32 bit and and tdragon.net has 32 and 64 bit installers to name two. clang offers some new optimization techniques still using gcc. many more options than openwatcom.
I don't know how a 20meg zio becomes almost 200 meg installed. part of the reason is there are many small files which nevertheless on windows take up the full allocation block, so you will see different installed size based on the geometry of the storage? installing to a ramdrive, if you can afford, it will be much faster than where I have it on a USB hard drive. will probably always take longer to edit a program than it does to build it.
I'm not sure it's as easy to mix versions of librarys, gcc 4.4, 4.5 etc. so that is another possible bug vector.
the extra minute or two to compile and the larger installed size of minGW probably aren't that much of a factor for most people any more. there's always another something alt+tab or a few steps away to pass free time.
anyone building and testing euphoria or wanting to do extra optimizations/makefile hacking on their own programs might want to also get msys or mintty as an improved console that handles forward slashes that minGW often requires. it can really trip you up if you are not expecting it.
vote? I don't have to avoid all the ifdef #WATCOM stuff and port and retest every bug fix/feature request, which BTW takes umpteen hours a week and is logically a source of bugs, even if all goes well. count me neutral, that is, with the majority slightly for dropping. is really a no brainer. (I already use minGW, so a little bias.)
the lack of 64 compiler is less of a concern right now, but eventually, the topic will be dropping 32 bit support altogether.
no one should suggest there will be no pain switching to minGW. for developers and users. though once it is installed, for compiling translated euphoria programs it should be no more difficult than watcom to get an executable. you can UPX them too.
I have started to wonder if the support calls will simply increase if gcc is the only windows compiler option. for sure in the short term. especially if we can't bundle an offline installer giving someone the option to use the online installer to update later. many projects include a version of minGW gcc in their source tree to avoid this problem.
