Which compiler will Python 2.5 / Windows (Intel) be built with?

[meyer at mesw.de]

Martin,

thanks for the tip, I wasn't fully aware of that. OTOH, though GCC
might be a theoretical alternative, it isn't a practical one for many
situations:

* In a professional environment, it opens up another can of potential
problems, where one would rather like to stay with one single
compiler/build system.
* I suppose Python's distutils have to be tweaked to work with GCC
* The Makefiles/build system will need to be changed to work with the
GCC toolchain
* The different semantics of GCC and Microsoft C often need rewriting
some of the code
* There is no support for MFC/ATL in GCC
* The code created by the Windows GCC is not as good as the one created
by the Microsoft compiler


Markus

Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> meyer at mesw.de wrote:
> > the problem is not the ABI, but the runtime libraries. From what you're
> > saying, it looks like we will have to standardize on VS2003. As I said,
> > we need to buy VS anyway because of the MFC support. On the other hand,
> > I really worry about all those people that want to build open source
> > extensions for Python 2.5. It is really possible that there will be no
> > legal, free way to do that soon if you don't have an old installation
> > of the 2003 toolkit lying around somewhere...
>
> As others have pointed out already: This is not true. You can build
> Python extensions with GCC just fine; gcc provides an import library
> for msvcr71.dll.
>
> It might be possible to integrate an msvcr71.dll import library
> with VS 2005, in which case you could use VS 2005 to create Python
> extensions as well.
> 
> Regards,
> Martin