[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: MS-Windows build broken in Fmake_network_process
From: |
Stephen J. Turnbull |
Subject: |
Re: MS-Windows build broken in Fmake_network_process |
Date: |
Thu, 01 Apr 2010 00:28:01 +0900 |
Eli Zaretskii writes:
> > From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden>
> > Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 13:57:31 +0900
> > Cc: Óscar Fuentes <address@hidden>, address@hidden
> >
> > Richard Stallman writes:
> >
> > > However, it is not a high priority for us, because supporting any
> > > version of Windows is not a high priority for us. We have no
> > > commitment to support Windows 9, or Windows 7, or any version of
> > > Windows. People work on this if they want to do it, and they can
> > > choose which platforms to support.
> >
> > The point is that some developers find the very need to make the
> > choice (eg, having to parse #ifdefs that refer to Windows-related
> > code) annoying
>
> I fail to see how these #ifdefs should be more annoying than similar
> ones for Posix systems.
Nobody said that they were more annoying than other #ifdefs, only that
they are more annoying than no #ifdefs. Haven't you recently removed
quite a few #ifdefs and #defines in the process of pruning away code
for supporting extinct *nix systems? I know we have.
> And the issue in this thread was not about dropping Windows support
> altogether, only about supporting older Windows systems, which
> contribute no #ifdefs whatsoever.
Whatever. Eli, one of the reasons I work on XEmacs, not SXEmacs, is
that SXEmacs made the choice to remove *all* Windows support. It's a
decision I disagree with, personally. But I acknowledge their
motivation, and I think you and Richard are making a mistake by
ignoring the costs those #ifdefs and maintenance of the Windows code
do impose on non-Windows developers, and saying that it's only an
issue of whether Windows developers want to support it or not.
- Re: MS-Windows build broken in Fmake_network_process, (continued)
- Re: MS-Windows build broken in Fmake_network_process, Richard Stallman, 2010/03/29
- Re: MS-Windows build broken in Fmake_network_process, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/03/31
- Re: MS-Windows build broken in Fmake_network_process, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/03/31
- Re: MS-Windows build broken in Fmake_network_process, Juanma Barranquero, 2010/03/31
- Re: MS-Windows build broken in Fmake_network_process, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/03/31
- Re: MS-Windows build broken in Fmake_network_process, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/03/31
- Re: MS-Windows build broken in Fmake_network_process, Juanma Barranquero, 2010/03/31
- Re: MS-Windows build broken in Fmake_network_process, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/03/31
- Re: MS-Windows build broken in Fmake_network_process, Juanma Barranquero, 2010/03/31
- OT: (was: MS-Windows build broken in Fmake_network_process), Stefan Monnier, 2010/03/31
- Re: MS-Windows build broken in Fmake_network_process,
Stephen J. Turnbull <=
- Re: MS-Windows build broken in Fmake_network_process, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/03/31
- Re: MS-Windows build broken in Fmake_network_process, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/03/31
- Re: MS-Windows build broken in Fmake_network_process, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/03/31
- Re: MS-Windows build broken in Fmake_network_process, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/03/31
- Re: MS-Windows build broken in Fmake_network_process, Christoph, 2010/03/27
- Re: Windows 9X compatibility, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/03/28
- Re: Windows 9X compatibility, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/03/28
- Re: Windows 9X compatibility, Lennart Borgman, 2010/03/28
- Re: Windows 9X compatibility, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/03/28
- Re: Windows 9X compatibility, Juanma Barranquero, 2010/03/28