Ilias Lazaridis wrote: > The first step is to make a pyMinGW project. >
You are mistaken. The first steps are the following: 1) Realizing that a project _must_ start not because you want it to, but because those who are willing to work on it think it is worth the extra effort for it to. 2) Realizing that what best scratches your back is non other than your own nails. No one is going to do any extra effort for you (or anyone else for that matter) if they have some good reason not to. And both the author of pyMinGW and Tim have already given enough reasons for those who wondered why there is no official Python support for the MinGW compiler earlier in this very thread. 3) Realizing that there _is_ already a project called pyMinGW! That it does not fit your requirements-- whatever these maybe-- is an altogether different issue. The fact of the matter remains that a project _does_ exist, one which people (including myself) do in fact use; and because it does exist there is no reason to "make" it. > If one is intrested, he has possibly more luck [than I had] to convince > the author of pyMinGW. Of what? To make pyMinGW? To do extra work to your liking that was shown to be nnnecessary especially when pyMinGW can currently get the job done? Let alone the free compiler available for all to use? Whether you realize it or not, those who are interested will download pyMinGW and will test it and they will use it if they find it useful. It is their choice to do so. It is apparent that not only have you not done that, but that you also seem not interested in doing so. That too is your choice. I suspect that no one is going to lose sleep over either choice. I hope I don't come across as condescending, which I hope I never am, but I know I won't. Life goes on. Khalid -- pyMinGW: http://jove.prohosting.com/iwave/ipython/pyMinGW.html -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
