Re: [Chicken-users] stable version?

[Peter Bex]

On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 03:46:00PM -0300, Alex Queiroz wrote:
> Hallo,
> 
> On 9/21/07, John Cowan <address@hidden> wrote:
> > Shawn Rutledge scripsit:
> >
> > > It would be nice if there were auto-generated "stable" Windows (and
> > > Mac) binaries too.  It's just make PLATFORM=cross-linux-mingw for
> > > Windows, right?
> >
> > I don't really see much point.  Windows users may like installable binaries
> > (I did too when I was being a Windows user) but the target for Chicken
> > is developers.  Developers shouldn't be afraid to compile code.
> >
> 
>      So only Unix developers are welcome? Because today Chicken is
> very difficult to compile on Windows, it's not just a case of
> lazyness.

I think it's more a matter of that only Unix developers have worked on chicken
itself.  You don't seriously mean to say that Unix developers should be forced
to make something work on a system they loathe and don't use themselves?

If the Windows build is to be kept up to date, some Windows developer will have
to do that work.  Look what happened after all the hard work Brandon put into
it.  It was welcomed with open arms, but when it proved to be unmaintainable,
Windows support was the first to go.

Moral of the story is: Any system is supported as long as there is someone
there to actually provide that support.  Otherwise it's not going to happen.

Peter
-- 
http://sjamaan.ath.cx
--
"The process of preparing programs for a digital computer
 is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically
 and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic
 experience much like composing poetry or music."
                                                        -- Donald Knuth

pgpSusyfFPNGf.pgp
Description: PGP signature