OpenEuphoria

Re: Rob Q: MacOS X Euphoria

• Posted by Vincent <darkvincentdude at yahoo.com> Jul 18, 2005
• 530 views

D. Newhall wrote:
> 
> Vincent wrote:
> > 
> > Also, you might add on that suggestion list I sent you by email a while ago.
> > That you
> > should use the latest version of OpenWatcom and GCC for all your 32 bit
> > products, when
> > it's time to build v3.0. I would say by then the latest would be OpenWatcom
> > v1.4 or
> > v1.5, and GCC v4.1.
> You most likely do NOT want to use the new version of OpenWatcom (1.3). It
> introduced
> a bunch of bugs and a very large amount of code now no longer works with the
> new version.
> 

I wasnt aware of that, but if you are, I bet the developers are too and most if
not all of em should be fixed by v1.4, which should be coming out real soon...
v1.3 has been out for 10 months now (lots of time for bug fixes). I use Open
Watcom v1.3 for all translated/compiled programs. They all work 100%, thus I have
yet to see ANY compatability problems.

> 
> > Don't forget about 64 bit products either. That may not be possible for 3.0,
> > but soon
> > after please. I'm going to get a nice dual core AMD machine next.
> There is no real reason for Euphoria to be 64-bit at this time. There are a
> million
> other things you could/should do before you add 64-bit support since I bet
> only a small
> number of people have 64-bit processors yet alone have a 64-bit OS.
> 

Fair enough, but 2006 is going to be the year in which dual-core, 64 bit CPUs
will take over the computer market domain. 64 bit Euphoria could wait a bit
longer, but eventually an additional 64-bit version of the products will be
nessecary, along with thread-safety.

Regards,
Vincent