[Numpy-discussion] Moving to gcc 4.* for win32 installers ?

[Ralf Gommers]

On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 12:18 PM, David Cournapeau <cournape at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 5:19 PM, Ralf Gommers
> <ralf.gommers at googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Hi David,
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 3:02 PM, David Cournapeau <cournape at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I was wondering if we could finally move to a more recent version of
> >> compilers for official win32 installers. This would of course concern
> >> the next release cycle, not the ones where beta/rc are already in
> >> progress.
> >>
> >> Basically, the pros:
> >>  - we will have to move at some point
> >>  - gcc 4.* seem less buggy, especially C++ and fortran.
> >>  - no need to maintain msvcr90 vodoo
> >> The cons:
> >>  - it will most likely break the ABI
> >>  - we need to recompile atlas (but I can take care of it)
> >>  - the biggest: it is difficult to combine gfortran with visual
> >> studio (more exactly you cannot link gfortran runtime to a visual
> >> studio executable). The only solution I could think of would be to
> >> recompile the gfortran runtime with Visual Studio, which for some
> >> reason does not sound very appealing :)
> >
> > To get the datetime changes to work with MinGW, we already concluded that
> > building with 4.x is more or less required (without recognizing some of
> the
> > points you list above). Changes to mingw32ccompiler to fix compilation
> with
> > 4.x went in in https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/156. It would be
> good if
> > you could check those.
>
> I will look into it more carefully, but overall, it seems that
> building atlas 3.8.4, numpy and scipy with gcc 4.x works quite well.
> The main issue is that gcc 4.* adds some dependencies on mingw dlls.
> There are two options:
>  - adding the dlls in the installers
>  - statically linking those, which seems to be a bad idea
> (generalizing the dll boundaries problem to exception and things we
> would rather not care about:
> http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2007-06/msg00332.html).
>
> > It probably makes sense make this move for numpy 1.7. If this breaks the
> ABI
> > then it would be easiest to make numpy 1.7 the minimum required version
> for
> > scipy 0.11.
>
> My thinking as well.
>
>
Hi David, what is the current status of this issue? I kind of forgot this
is a prerequisite for the next release when starting the 1.7.0 release
thread.

Thanks,
Ralf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20111213/de9636de/attachment.html>