1 |
On 1/17/2012 08:39 AM, Mike Edenfield wrote: |
2 |
> On 1/17/2012 1:55 AM, Chris Walters wrote: |
3 |
>> that have make files for MS Visual Studio. I have no interest in purchasing |
4 |
>> Visual Studio. |
5 |
> |
6 |
> Just a point of interest: "Visual Studio" doesn't use Makefiles; Visual C++ can |
7 |
> import Makefile projects if you ask it to, but it has its own project file |
8 |
> format. If you're seeing actual make files (and not, say, a .sln file or .cproj |
9 |
> file) then you don't need Studio, just an nmake-compatible version of make. |
10 |
> |
11 |
> If you do have project and solution files from Visual Studio, they are just |
12 |
> MSBuild projects (think "ant for Windows"). I'm pretty sure there are |
13 |
> open-source variants of MSBuild, possibly in the Mono project? |
14 |
> |
15 |
> And of course, Visual C++ Express is free, though you'd need to find somewhere |
16 |
> to set it up. |
17 |
|
18 |
Just a note: I used to do all of my programming in Visual Studio. I stopped |
19 |
when I needed to do things that VS wouldn't let me do, and also because I |
20 |
discovered GNU/Linux. |
21 |
|
22 |
As for the types of files I've seen, I have seen both VS Solution/Project |
23 |
files, and nmake files. Most of the time, I just use the configure script with |
24 |
x86_64-w64-mingw32 as my host, and it works fine. |
25 |
|
26 |
Do you, by chance, know where I can find an nmake-compatible version of make? |
27 |
Also, do you have a link for Visual C++ Express? I like to do most programming |
28 |
in C/C++ anyway (though this is OT). |
29 |
|
30 |
Thanks for your reply, it was enlightening... When I did most of my |
31 |
programming, portability was not an issue - now it is virtually a must. |
32 |
|
33 |
Chris |
34 |
|
35 |
|
36 |
--- |
37 |
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean. |
38 |
Virus Database (VPS): 120117-0, 01/17/2012 |
39 |
Tested on: 1/17/2012 9:26:56 AM |
40 |
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2012 AVAST Software. |
41 |
http://www.avast.com |