On Sun, 26 Oct 2014 08:11:39 +1100 Chris Angelico <rosuav at gmail.com> wrote: > > It might fragment the community to have multiple different binary > distributions. But it ought to be possible for any person/organization > to say "We're going to make our own build of Python, with these > extension modules, built with this compiler, targeting this platform", > and do everything from source. That might mean they can no longer take > the short-cut of "download someone's MSVC-built extension and use it > as-is", but they should be able to take anyone's extension and build > it on their chosen compiler. Having MinGW as a formally supported > platform would make life a lot easier for people who want to test > CPython patches, for instance - my building and testing of PEP > 463-enhanced Python was Linux-only, And how do you know that it would have worked with MSVC if you only use MinGW? If you want to ensure compatibility with MSVC, you must build with MSVC. There's no working around that. Regards Antoine.
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