Jump to content


Photo

eclipse / mingw build compatibility

eclipse mingw development

  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 mojmir

mojmir

    BB Developer

  • Moderators
  • 254 posts

Posted 07 March 2014 - 02:29 PM

[color=#ff0000;](work in progress)[/color]

 

i really feel it is not fair to discriminate mingw... it's just msvc is like a comfy chair these days. it's not anymore that annyoing twat it used to be back in 2003 ;)
 

so i fixed the basic build system for those who prefer mingw based environments. or for those who like to maintain some compatibility.

 

some basic instructions are available in another thread, i just added eclipse/mingw section to the bottom:

 

http://blackbox4wind...urces/#entry375

 

if you are receiving strange errors about access denied to c:Program Files Whatever then you probably

need redirect install directory to something less harmless. You can do it by uncommenting following line in top-level CMakeLists.txt

# use this for develoment, if you do not pass it from command line:set(CMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX "c:/bbLean_devel")

Issues:

* diabol will stop using c++11 deliberately just because he is lazy ;P especially in blackbox core!

* rc (windres) seems to be broken with cmake+mingw

 

few plugins are excluded in the mingw build:

* anything with itunes

* foobar2000 sdk is not ported for mingw

* plugins manager is excluded from core



#2 diabol

diabol

    Lazyass

  • Moderators
  • 235 posts

Posted 08 March 2014 - 06:57 AM

Why the bloody hell should i stop using c++11 when gcc supported it long before msvc ever did?

Just because we are keeping support for mingw in mind doesn't mean we have to support compiler versions from last decade.



#3 mojmir

mojmir

    BB Developer

  • Moderators
  • 254 posts

Posted 08 March 2014 - 07:31 AM

"auto" in this case is just plain laziness, nothing more. i wouldn't object if you store some esoteric template expression like boost::spirit.

but breaking backward compatibility for auto icon = "gimme an icon"? common

 

i have no objections to modern stuff, but not like that. this is not justified.

 

so first you stop making a decade old mistakes (like the stuff with char** you have there) then we can talk about c++11 ;P



#4 diabol

diabol

    Lazyass

  • Moderators
  • 235 posts

Posted 08 March 2014 - 11:32 AM

well, i was about to write a wall of texts on the merits of backwards compatibility versus the merits of modern compilers, but then i figured.

 

i am not afraid of breaking backwards compatibility with 4 year old compilers and i will not justify my code.

also, i will definitely replace old-school bugs with their modern equivalents as i get up to speed with c++11

 

if you find my code to be unjustified, i will not expect you to justify making any changes you deem fit to turn it into justifiable code.



#5 mojmir

mojmir

    BB Developer

  • Moderators
  • 254 posts

Posted 09 March 2014 - 08:17 AM

what the fsck is merit of writing auto my_lazines = icon->size? are you THAT ignorant?

 

this is not about being afraid, i am not afraid of c++11. but you are doing it in a very dumb and childish way.

 

this way you won't get any speedup boy :) you are trying to justify your laziness. you came from some crazy ass modern language like .net and you think you know how to program in c/c++ (this can be seen in you code to a good point).

 

i do not need this... one that is jalous of something and one who does not know his c (and c++) properly and wants to write in c++++, great. i quit. or i fork and quit, whatever.



#6 pitkon

pitkon

    Administrator

  • Head Administrator
  • 1,205 posts
  • LocationAthens & Nafplio, Greece

Posted 09 March 2014 - 09:59 AM

I don't think this is the proper way for two ready, willing and able developers to solve disputes. I mean you are both grown up guys, right? Your common interests are many more than the things that may divide you and a community is looking up to you, waiting for some great stuff. Shake hands and move on, guys :)



#7 diabol

diabol

    Lazyass

  • Moderators
  • 235 posts

Posted 09 March 2014 - 11:37 AM

what the fsck is merit of writing auto my_lazines = icon->size? are you THAT ignorant?

 

this is not about being afraid, i am not afraid of c++11. but you are doing it in a very dumb and childish way.

 

this way you won't get any speedup boy :) you are trying to justify your laziness. you came from some crazy ass modern language like .net and you think you know how to program in c/c++ (this can be seen in you code to a good point).

 

i do not need this... one that is jalous of something and one who does not know his c (and c++) properly and wants to write in c++++, great. i quit. or i fork and quit, whatever.

 

Look moj, you are right.

I do come from crazy ass modern languages like C#, Java and Haskell, which have some very nice features which make code readable and easier to write.

 

In these languages, you are typically so far away from the hardware that you develop a habit of using higher-level algorithmic optimizations.

Also they have a consistent language which only one or two compilers implement.

 

Stuff like type-interference, function overloading or lambdas can really simplify code and make it more expressive and in turn readable.

I would rather write 'auto item = c_new(struct StyleItem);' than 'struct StyleItem* item = c_new(struct StyleItem);'

or 'auto head = list_fst(plugins);' instead of 'struct PluginList* head = list_fst(plugins);'

 

If the compiler can infer the type perfectly well, then why should i write it down another time?

 

I have yet to settle on a specific C++ coding style, but I do know that I'd like to squeeze some juice out of modern C++ features and that I'd like to use functional language features where it's reasonable (immutable data structures come to mind).

 

But still, did I get this right? You are telling me that I should stop using auto until I start with Template Fu?

If it makes you happy, I will do just that.

 

I can be an ass, I know, but like you I do not want to discuss this at great length.

However, if you sweat enough over this small issue that it makes you quit, then you might as well.

 

We will have bigger issues, they will require discussions, these will be at length and people quitting when they start will not help us at all.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users