Paul Moore wrote: > I don't know if Martin has already done this, but it needs doing. I'm > not a distutils expert, but I am willing to look at it in the longer > term. I haven't changed any Python file at all in the process of compiling with VC 7.1. However, Python (since 2.3) indicates the compiler used to build it in sys.version; I believe this could be used as an indication to find out whether it was build with VC6 or VC7.1 (dunno whether it could also tell apart 7.0 and 7.1). > If there wasn't a Windows binary version for 2.4 produced, this would > cause me problems. Python 2.4 is still months ahead, I expect more copies of VC 7.1 being available by that time (unless Microsoft releases the next compiler version before that - but they are unlikely to do so until the very end of 2004). > At the very least, I'd suggest a warning post on c.l.p and > c.l.p.announce, something to the effect of "Python 2.4 will be built > with MSVC 7.1. Extension developers supplying binary distributions for > Windows will need some way of building MSVC 7.1 compatible modules > (MSVC 7.1 itself, or a recent version of the free Mingw compiler > package) to continue providing binries." I expect the word will spread quickly; again, there is plenty of time to prepare for that. Regards, Martin
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