Re: Performance issues on Windows, suggests a MSVC build

[Philip Nienhuis]

John W. Eaton wrote:
> On 24-Jun-2011, Philip Nienhuis wrote:
>
> | (1) Facilitate easy setup of a build environment, if possible along the
> | lines of the current MingW installers.
> |     Given MingW's dynamics, standardizing on some snapshot and updating
> | annually or so might be handy
>
> So now the Octave project is responsible for fixing the problems
> associated with setting up MinGW?

I wrote about what can be done, not about who should do it.

> | (2) Somehow share prebuilt dependencies (compiled libraries, patched include
> | stuff, etc).
> |     Octave-forge?
>
> And now we are also responsible for making some kind of package system
> (or something) so that it is easier to build dependencies on Windows
> systems?

Same here.

> | Perhaps someone can even zip&  upload his/her complete MingW build
> | environment + dependencies, including some instructions for path settings
> | etc.
>
> So who is supposed to do that?  Are those of us who don't use and
> don't even like Windows supposed to be the ones to do it?

I am sorry that you get the impression that I suggest to put this burden 
on the Octave community, especially on that part of it that loathes Windows.

What I tried was to sketch my perception of the situation in which 
Octave development under Windows is in, plus a suggestion of steps that 
I think need to be taken to improve it.


BTW I simply gave an answer to your own question:
"> We have many Windows users, but not much in the way of Windows
 > developers.  How can we change this? "

Given the not so positive attitude to Windows that I taste, and the 
extra stumbling blocks compared to Linux, I suppose the most rational 
outcome is: just wait until someone steps forward to do something.
It's just the fate of almost all OSS that largely depends on volunteers.

I have already tried a few times to get started. But steps 1 & 2 in my 
previous posting are too much for me, given my proficiency, available 
time for this project, and priorities. Moreover, if Octave-3.2.4-MingW 
can't serve me well enough I can easily resort to Linux for Octave-3.4.x.


> | John W. Eaton<jwe<at>  octave.org>  Wed Jun 22 16:06:28 CDT 2011 writes:
> |
> |>  Windows binary that should be sufficient to get competent programmers
> |>  started and it has been downloaded a fairly large number of times, yet
> |>  I'm still waiting to see the Windows programmers contributing.
> |
> | ?
> | No offense taken, but e.g., most of what I contributed came from Octave
> | under Windows (but is applicable to any OS). Windows is where I use Octave
> | the most often.
> | And I guess you overlooked octave-forge contributors? A number of them do
> | their development work on Windows as well.
> | But perhaps I've misunderstood what you wrote.
>
> I was talking about people who are actually working on the core of
> Octave itself, for Windows, not just writing .m files with Octave
> running on Windows.

By "...working on the core of Octave itself, for Windows..." do you mean 
working on those specific issues that make Octave look and work 
different under Windows than under Linux?
Or also making Octave itself better, whether it runs under Windows, 
Linux, Solaris, OSX, etc.?

The former is probably more or less part of, or related to, the 
development environment (or tool chain, or whatever it is called). Yes, 
the hardest part.

Philip