>A perhaps less risky alternative is to use the mingw build of OCaml.
>I encourage all our advanced Windows users to give it a try and let us
>know if it works well.  If it does, it might provide a better
>alternative to the MSVC build (working -pack, no need to fetch MASM
>from obscure places, etc).

I think we need to keep the msvc build running properly.  As I've said 
before, I think most professional (as opposed to academic) windows 
programmers are more comfortable with msvc, for better or for worse.

Of course, if the solution to the -pack problem is to have people install 
binutils, then it's not a pure msvc solution anyway...but, it's still 
better to be able to use all of the familiar tools (like the debugger) on 
the resulting executables and any c code linked in.  Downloading binutils 
is just a minor annoyance, as is downloading masm.  Switching compilers is 
a more major step for people (after they've already chosen to try out ocaml).

Another option is to require binutils for the msvc build, and get rid of 
the masm requirement and just use "as" as the assembler, since it generates 
coff anyway.  That would coallesce all the i386 code that's currently 
duplicated between gnu and masm in the whole compiler, and you'd get -pack 
working on msvc as part of this.

 > I don't fully understand what you're describing.  Let us (you and me)
>discuss that off-list once you've experimented some more.

Okay, I'll mail you.

Chris

-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners