[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

How to install the free compiler for Windows

djberg96

10/28/2004 11:21:00 PM

Hi all,

I've put up a wiki page for how to install the free Windows compiler.
You can find it at http://www.rubygarden.org/ruby?Windo....

Enjoy!

Dan
8 Answers

Joao Pedrosa

10/29/2004 12:17:00 AM

0

Hi,

> I've put up a wiki page for how to install the free Windows compiler.
> You can find it at http://www.rubygarden.org/ruby?Windo....

Thanks for that! I'm going to try out your recipe and report anything. :-)

Cheers,
Joao

Alexander Kellett

10/29/2004 8:25:00 AM

0

On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 08:23:59AM +0900, Daniel Berger wrote:
> I've put up a wiki page for how to install the free Windows compiler.
> You can find it at http://www.rubygarden.org/ruby?Windo....

anyone able to summarize a few reasons for
using m$'s compiler versus using the vc toolkit
stuff? gcc is slow admittedly. the m$ stuff is
nice and fast?

Alex

gabriele renzi

10/29/2004 8:47:00 AM

0

Alexander Kellett ha scritto:

> On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 08:23:59AM +0900, Daniel Berger wrote:
>
>>I've put up a wiki page for how to install the free Windows compiler.
>>You can find it at http://www.rubygarden.org/ruby?Windo....
>
>
> anyone able to summarize a few reasons for
> using m$'s compiler versus using the vc toolkit
> stuff?

are'nt MS' compiler and VC the same thing? :)

> gcc is slow admittedly. the m$ stuff is
> nice and fast?

indeed, people told me many times that VC7 is really fast.
Anyway, I guess the primary reason is to allow compilation of extensions
that easily interoperate with the onceclick installer (mingw somewhat
works, but not everytime)

Alexander Kellett

10/29/2004 8:56:00 AM

0

On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 05:48:59PM +0900, gabriele renzi wrote:
> are'nt MS' compiler and VC the same thing? :)

erm. oops yes :) i meant gcc vs m$

> indeed, people told me many times that VC7 is really fast.

k. thought so. good enough reason for me. thanks :)

> Anyway, I guess the primary reason is to allow compilation of extensions
> that easily interoperate with the onceclick installer (mingw somewhat
> works, but not everytime)

won't this cause problems with extensions that need unix
specific stuff? or should they just be ported in any case?

heard that mingw latest version has very few interoperability
problems. however i'd like qt bindings for windows and i'm not
certain that mingw specific libs exist and i guess it'll be easier
to get stuff working using the vc stuff therefore. does limit
build env. to windows admittedly but i doubt thats gonna be a
real problem.

Alex

nobu.nokada

10/29/2004 9:01:00 AM

0

Hi,

At Fri, 29 Oct 2004 17:48:59 +0900,
gabriele renzi wrote in [ruby-talk:118227]:
> indeed, people told me many times that VC7 is really fast.
> Anyway, I guess the primary reason is to allow compilation of extensions
> that easily interoperate with the onceclick installer (mingw somewhat
> works, but not everytime)

Extensions compiled with mingw32 are binary compatible with
mswin32 ruby.

--
Nobu Nakada

gabriele renzi

10/29/2004 9:26:00 AM

0

nobu.nokada@softhome.net ha scritto:


> Extensions compiled with mingw32 are binary compatible with
> mswin32 ruby.
>

you mean I *should expect* this and report different experiences as a bug?
Cause I actually had libraries that caused segfaults when compiled with
mingw and used with the one click installer(I recall that the
StrongTyping module did this).
Should I report my problems here, if that happens or is this matter of
the mingw team?

nobu.nokada

10/29/2004 10:32:00 AM

0

Hi,

At Fri, 29 Oct 2004 18:28:58 +0900,
gabriele renzi wrote in [ruby-talk:118231]:
> > Extensions compiled with mingw32 are binary compatible with
> > mswin32 ruby.

At first, correction.

| Extensions compiled with mingw32 are binary compatible with
| mswin32-vc[56] ruby.

BTW, the runtime DLL of VC7 is freely redistributable with
ruby?

> you mean I *should expect* this and report different experiences as a bug?
> Cause I actually had libraries that caused segfaults when compiled with
> mingw and used with the one click installer(I recall that the
> StrongTyping module did this).

Hmmm, it's a difficult point.

> Should I report my problems here, if that happens or is this matter of
> the mingw team?

In general, ruby-core will be better, or the bug tracker on
rubyforge:

http://rubyforge.org/pro...
http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?gr...

--
Nobu Nakada

Randy W. Sims

10/29/2004 10:32:00 AM

0

gabriele renzi wrote:
> nobu.nokada@softhome.net ha scritto:
>
>
>> Extensions compiled with mingw32 are binary compatible with
>> mswin32 ruby.
>>
>
> you mean I *should expect* this and report different experiences as a bug?
> Cause I actually had libraries that caused segfaults when compiled with
> mingw and used with the one click installer(I recall that the
> StrongTyping module did this).
> Should I report my problems here, if that happens or is this matter of
> the mingw team?

I haven't used MinGW in a while, but it used to be that it used the same
C runtime (msvcrt) as VC6. I don't know if that is still the case. If it
is, then using it with a extension compiled with VC7+ may cause problems
since the runtime was changed. Using different runtimes can result in
memory be allocated in one runtime and deallocated in another... likely
producing a segfault. Another possible problem would be IO buffering issues.

In general, MinGW and VC are only compatible if they use the same C
Runtime library. Otherwise, expect unexpected behaviour.

Randy.