On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 12:26:43PM +0100, Steve Lhomme wrote: > Diego Biurrun wrote: > >On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 09:25:38AM +0100, Steve Lhomme wrote: > >>Michael Niedermayer wrote: > >>>On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 10:15:00AM +0100, Steve Lhomme wrote: > >>>>Anyway, C99 doesn't cover inline ASM AFAIK so you can't seriously say > >>>>that FFMPEG is not designed for gcc. > >>>you know very well that they are under #ifdefs (some of the other people > >>>who claimed that ffmpeg where written for gcc may or may not have known > >>>that but you do as you have worked with the code) > >>The ASM code is #ifdef'd by the makefile. If you compile the code with > >>another compiler it will fail because the ifdefs are not clean. I > >>actually made some changes recently to DrFFMPEG to have both ppc and > >>i386 ASM compiled in the same project at the same time (to make > >>universal binaries in XCode) and I had to add some cleaner #ifdef's. > > > >Why exactly are the #ifdefs not clean? It's much cleaner to control > >conditional compilation from the build system instead of using the > >preprocessor. > > Until it's made irrelevant for universal/fat binaries as in Darwin/OS X. The build system is made irrelevant? This is not an answer to my question. IMO universal/fat binaries are just a special case of cross-compilation. Also, since you produce two binaries, simply building two times is not out of the question. Diego
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4