[antlr-interest] Free MSVC compiler

matthew ford Matthew.Ford at forward.com.au
Thu Mar 11 12:12:49 PST 2004


Hi Ric,

You can down load the MSVC compiler for free now, as part of the .Net stuff
I downloaded it but have not tried to use it yet (still using V6 for what
ever C I get forced into mainly JNI to libraries and don't use C++ at all)

matthew
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ric Klaren" <klaren at cs.utwente.nl>
To: <antlr-interest at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, March 12, 2004 1:57 AM
Subject: Re: [antlr-interest] My antlr 2 bashing list


> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 07:11:41PM -0000, J. Stephen Riley Silber wrote:
> > (Er, gimme a sec whilst I put on my bullet-proof jacket here...)
> >
> > BETTER MSVC INTEGRATION SUPPORT.  *ducks the rocks*  I know we all
> > hate M$, and I'm no exception.  But for the love of god, there's a
> > LOT of development going on in MSVC these days, and ignoring the poor
> > saps (like me) who have to use it is not so nice.  Basically, we need
> > for ANTLR to be truly platform agnostic, not just *nix agnostic.
>
> I only have limited access to MSVC6. So I can't really test stuff for
MSVC.
> Basically I'm very close to the point to drop all MSVC support except for
> structural things in the codegen (the extra #define's in class headers
> stuff like that)
>
> When I started there was pretty much no MSVC out of the box support I then
> naively said that I would like to support it. By now I'm more tending to
> the opinion that I should not try to support a compiler that is 'weird'
and
> I cannot test myself. Trying to cobble together community patches and
> fail/success reports is not very effective.
>
> I think it would save myself and the community a lot of aggravation if
> after an ANTLR release there's someone who cobbles up a MSVC-Version-X
> rescue kit and puts it in the filesharing section.
>
> To be clear about it I did not make the final decision to completely drop
> MSVC yet. But if the 2.7.3 release will be another disaster MSVC wise I
> might. So MSVC users grab those snapshots and prereleases and test them
> till you drop and give (good & specific) feedback!
>
> > To whit:
> > * NMAKE-compatible makefiles for the C++ libs.  If we can cobble up
> > NMAKE makefiles, then we're cool with Ric--we're purely command-
> > line.  I got no problem with that, since if you can make an NMAKE
> > file, you can make a GUI project for it.
>
> If someone makes these for the latest snapshot/prerelease I'll drop them
in
> the contrib section. Please be clear about for which MSVC version they are
> though. Also DSP/DSW files are welcome. I don't expect any changes in the
> amount of header/source files unless I get time to port the
> TokenStreamRewrite stuff.
>
> To sum it up:
> - Or things work out mostly via 2.7.3 release and MSVC getting saner with
>   versions 7.0+7.1. And I'll meddle on with whatever comes my way in
patches.
> - Or MSVC support gets dropped
> - Or it will be third party via antlr.org filesharing
> - Or someone steps up to do *continued* MSVC support (who has the
compilers
>   etc)
> - Or someone donates a license of MSVC for ANTLR support licensed to Ter
>   maybe? (If I'd personally buy it, I'd buy the full version usable for
>   commercial stuff, but to dish out that amount of cash for something I'd
>   mainly use for ANTLR I'd have to fall on my head pretty hard)
>
> I'm not against MSVC per se, but I don't want the hassle it gives at the
> moment (not to mention the rude behaviour of some people in the MSVC
camp).
> I'd rather won't release something for a platform than release something
> halfworking for a platform.
>
> > * Has anyone mentioned smoke testing of builds yet?  If that's
> > already happening, let's get MSVC as a test target for the C++ libs.
>
> No compiler no test. Hmm no compiler no bugs.. no compiler no cry. Erm...
> No test suite no test too.. but less usable for puns...
>
> But seriously it would be very good to have a test suite. But heck I
didn't
> even have time to write one for the compiler/tool I work on. Also not
> familiar with the term smoke testing (I assume that's just checking if it
> builds? then again then we'd need a farm of machines/os/compilers to check
> everything probably not feasible for an opensource project at least not
> this one)
>
> > * A warning-free build for the C++ libs, for all major targets.  A
> > Windows build is still littered with warnings all over the place.
>
> Expecting a warning free build across all platforms is maybe not
realistic.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ric
> --
> -----+++++*****************************************************+++++++++--
-----
>     ---- Ric Klaren ----- j.klaren at utwente.nl ----- +31 53 4893722  ----
> -----+++++*****************************************************+++++++++--
-----
>  "Don't call me stupid." "Oh, right. To call you stupid would be an insult
>     to stupid people. I've known sheep that could outwit you! I've worn
>               dresses with higher IQs!" --- A Fish Called Wanda
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>



 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/antlr-interest/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
     antlr-interest-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
     http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



More information about the antlr-interest mailing list