[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2006/11/02]
> I imagine that all the problems noted only really matter if you're > trying to use it as a development environment, which would, to be blunt, > be a really fucking stupid thing to do. Yes, you should use Interix. Also if you're running applications that work with untrusted documents. Like just about anything. > If you want to write code for Unix, then write code *for Unix*. I want to write *portable* code. That means writing code using UNIX tools to the UNIX API whenever possible, because that is the only even vaguely sane portable API. I've written software for CP/M, MS-DOS, AmigaDOS, Win32, VMS, OS/9, RSX-11, and of course a whole variety of UNIX variants using the UNIX API. Even on NT, using the POSIX subsystem is infinitely better than using the native Win32 calls. > If you want to write code for Windows, then use the Windows tools. I hope to be in heaven half a day before the devil realises I've never written code using the Windows tools. Supported developers stuck with that godforsaken API. Fixed their code. Figured out how to work around its abominable limitations. But never sat down and started from scratch using it. Starting from scratch I write for the Unix Programmer's Manual sections 2 and 3, because I don't want to write it twice. > Approximately no-one should write code for > cygwin, for its goal is to provide a set of user tools, not to be a > development platform. It succeeds in meeting that goal. For me, a compiler *is* a user tool.
Generated at 16:01 on 02 Nov 2006 by mariachi 0.52