[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi everyone, > > which compiler will Python 2.5 on Windows (Intel) be built with? I > notice that Python 2.4 apparently has been built with the VS2003 > toolkit compiler, and I read a post from Scott David Daniels [1] where > he said that probably the VS2003 toolkit will be used for Python 2.5 > again. However, even before the release of Python 2.5, I cannot seem to > find many retailers around here that still carry Visual Studio 2003 ...
For me the great great problem with Python2.4's lib geometry was that the size of distributable app installers swelled suddenly by many megs with msvcr71.dll and mfc71 and codecs in core and all. Typically installer sizes went from 1.5MB to over 4MB for basic non-trivial apps. Thats a show stopper still in many situations today - at least for my requirements. See e.g. for an example of magnitudes: http://groups.google.de/group/comp.lang.python/msg/edf469a1b3dc3802 Updating to a new expensive compiler problem for extensions was secondary. Thus I decided so far to stay at Python2.3 for longer time for most projects, while I'm using Python2.4+ only for local/web scripts and single-installation projects. The little improvements in Python2.4/2.5 mostly don't justify their monster footprint in memory and installers. Some questions: * Is there a fundamental reason that the C-RTL of VC6 (which is pre-installed on on all Windows today) is not sufficient for current Python and extensions? instable? In case not: As the short living VS 2003 compiler is now more rare than the good old VC6, wouldn't it be better to switch back to VC6 for Py2.5 or at least to VC6 libs (which are maybe "free" of dev-license as they sit on each Windows). Maybe a suitable policy: the default crtl for Python should better be the default library of the OS and not that of a random compiler which is currently hip? * can't the Mingw/gcc be used together with Windows default crt/mfc libs for Python2.5 ? - Python getting away the from this MS studio (lib) harassment? ( Personally I'd give no cent for that little runtime speed advantage by the VS2005 compiler when comparing to a slimness + stable standard + freedom ) Together with a clear decision to clean the Python core libs from recent habits to "statically" preload OS-kind-of-packages (e.g. codecs, the licentious pre-imports in urllib and friends ), I'd have hope to get out of my deadlock on Python2.3. * how many (serious) python users require to build distributable installers (which have carry the python-rtls and non-default crtl's)? I guess, almost all GUI apps have this requirement? And GUI apps probably count more (also in line numbers) than web apps today as more and more Delphi, BCPPB, Java, C++/MFC developers switch to Python? -robert -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
