From: | "William ZHANG" <uniware(at)zedware(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> |
Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Call for 7.5 feature completion |
Date: | 2005-09-01 01:17:38 |
Message-ID: | 003b01c5ae93$28b2d000$1504a8c0@raymond |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
Cc: "William ZHANG" <uniware(at)zedware(dot)org>; <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2005 10:24 PM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Call for 7.5 feature completion
> Dave Page wrote:
> >
> >>* Compile with MSVC on Win32 platforms. MySQL support it.
> >>
> >So what? It would take a major amount of work, with no useful benefits.
>
> ... and you can compile all the client and library stuff with MSVC -
> just not the server nor extensions. But the audience for compiling those
> is far smaller.
I think the most popular method to build a project on Win32 is using
MSVC or Intel C. Intel C can be integrated with MSVC's IDE to help
developers increase their productivity. Actually I have tried to make
the backend of pgsql-8.0.3 build with MSVC 6.0, and it works well.
Should I polish it and send it as a patch?
Having been a Win32 developer for several years, I think it is more
convenient to use MSVC's IDE than CL.exe with NMAKE.exe.
Although I do not like Microsoft very much, and like to use MinGW
or Cygwin to do some small tests, MSVC is more suitable for
native Win32 development. If pgsql want to be the first class citizen
on Windows, and want to compete with MySQL, I think supporting
MSVC is important. I beleive there will be many contributions from
the Win32 world.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jaime Casanova | 2005-09-01 01:42:23 | TODO item: set proper permissions on non-system schemas |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2005-09-01 00:57:02 | Re: Minimally avoiding Transaction Wraparound in VLDBs |