[mingw32] Re: [RFC] changing gcc default output executable name (a.exe now)
Sat Jan 15 10:26:00 GMT 2000
I fully agree with all 4 points. I also feel it important to this: if we
*really* want another M$-LoseDoze compiler clone, then someone (Mumit
maybe?) can/should submit a "wgcc" variation; something built from GCC but
does everything the M$-LoseDoze way. Since it shouldn't then be expected to
be UNIX-y you can change most of the defaults without breaking existing code
that makes assumptions about gcc's workings.
----- Original Message -----
From: TOMMY REYNOLDS <email@example.com>
To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Todd Bandrowsky <email@example.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2000 10:03 AM
Subject: RE: [mingw32] Re: [RFC] changing gcc default output executable name
> I'd vote just the opposite: make an "a.out" file in both instances,
> 1) that's what
> UNIX does, it's expected; 2) that's what UNIX does, it's documented; 3)
> typing "a.out"
> under WinDo$e will run the file any - we don' need no steekin' suffixes
> anymore; and 4) it
> doesn't break anything we're trying to port from UNIX anyway..
> This is just one more "exactly the same as UNIX but with one subtle
> difference" nuisance.
> Want to unsubscribe from this list?
> Send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to email@example.com
More information about the Cygwin