Now try building a "portable" binary that runs on a version of Linux older than yours.
Cross-compiling binaries for Windows is easier than building natively
71–80 of 349 posts
Re: Cross-compiling binaries for Windows is easier than building natively
#72Only if you want to be trendchasing rather than letting backwards compatibility take care of itself...
I'm a native Win32 developer, have been one for a few decades, and know quite a few others still using MSVC6 because it's fast and enough for what they do. Takes Long file paths: Azure, OpenSearch, and ~90 other open source projects have to document how to enable long file paths on Windows because the default is a ~255 character limit.
Personally, I think 260 is long enough and plenty to work with, while at the same time discouraging the ridiculous verboseness that seems to have crept into "modern" software. Then again, I stay away from .NET, VSCode, and the like. I am reminded of this post by Raymond Chen:
https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20070301-00/?p=27...
Re: Cross-compiling binaries for Windows is easier than building natively
#73For me SDK sizes are showstopper. Mingw packages are probably 100-200 Mb total. To build anything native one has to install Windows (20+Gb in modern version and then Visual Studio 40+Gb). Not so easy to fit it all on an SSD drive. Xcode also have this problem now. 8Gb for Xcode 7 is manageable. But why 70Gb for Xcode 11?
I'm cross-compiling Mach engine[0] with Zig, it ends up being a quite small toolchain to cross-compile a game engine (using DirectX, Vulkan, OpenGL, and Metal on respective platforms) from any OS. The Zig toolchain is: * Windows: 61 MiB * Linux (x86): 49 MiB * macOS (x86): 42 MiB * macOS (arm): 38 MiB Zig provides almost everything that is needed to cross compile to those same targets out of the box, including libc a…
You can accomplish similar things by targeting, say, SDL2 with a C compiler. It's a nice solution when you don't need platform-specific stuff, but it's not a general substitute for having the platform SDK, alas. With that said, targeting SDL2 is what I do… but the apps I like to write are games.
Re: Cross-compiling binaries for Windows is easier than building natively
#74This what is called in Cognitive Behavioral Therapy "All or Nothing Thinking." Microsoft is a for-profit company. It is pro open-source when it helps them and closed source also when it helps them. I like the new Microsoft which has open sourced a lot of stuff. It's way better than the old closed source regime.
Oh, you and the article's author are either forgiven or seeing the best in people. Me, on the other hand, who lived the Microsoft with their shady dealings in Bill's / Ballmer's era, I remember their crushing on OEM's to not allow even a shred of openness in their systems. Only because of shifting in developer's in favor of Apple's / Google's Microsoft changed the tune with "Microsoft loves Linux". Bleah! I have no l…
Gates and Balmer are long gone and it's no longer the same company. If they only loved money, they wouldn't be amenable to their workers unionizing.
"CWA, Microsoft Announce Labor Neutrality Agreement"
https://cwa-union.org/news/releases/cwa-microsoft-announce-l...
Sorry to be this way, but I'm refreshing my memory about CBT today:
Over-generalization: Make a comprehensive, negative conclusion that is beyond the current situation.
Labeling and Mis-labeling: The extreme form of overgeneralization. Use fixed, comprehensive, and emotional language to label yourself or others.
Disqualifying the Positive: Unreasonably believe that positive experiences, behaviors or qualities do not count.
Jumping to Conclusions: Making a conclusion before having all the evidence.
Emotional Reasoning: Draw conclusions from your own feelings, because what I think is what the facts are.
Re: Cross-compiling binaries for Windows is easier than building natively
#75Configure autocrlf in what way? I don't want git to change my files, and I don't know what problems they're talking about.
Configure it to respect your preference ('don't change my files') and not pester you with hundreds of warnings any time you interact with Git if your preference differs:
warning: LF will be replaced by CRLF in src/au/policy/dao/EmailQueue.javaRe: Cross-compiling binaries for Windows is easier than building natively
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
But you don't have to develop on Macbook. So you intentionally chose a platform known for being really expensive and now your main complaint is that it's too expensive? I don't really think that the toolchain is to blame for that one.
I do need to develop on a Macbook. The hardware is just so much better than anything else out there. This is my personal opinion of course, but I would rather stop being a software developer than to develop software using a different laptop available on the market today.
Meanwhile I’d rather serve coffee than be a software developer on any laptop! I can’t fathom developing on anything other than a high-end desktop.
M1 is very impressive. But I hate macOS as much, if not more than, you hate Windows. My Threadripper makes me very happy.
Re: Cross-compiling binaries for Windows is easier than building natively
#77Only if you want to be trendchasing rather than letting backwards compatibility take care of itself... I'm a native Win32 developer, have been one for a few decades, and know quite a few others still using MSVC6 because it's fast and enough for what they do. Takes Long file paths: Azure, OpenSearch, and ~90 other open source projects have to document how to enable long file paths on Windows because the default is a ~…
It's incredibly fitting that all the links on that post are 403 Forbidden
Re: Cross-compiling binaries for Windows is easier than building natively
#78This what is called in Cognitive Behavioral Therapy "All or Nothing Thinking." Microsoft is a for-profit company. It is pro open-source when it helps them and closed source also when it helps them. I like the new Microsoft which has open sourced a lot of stuff. It's way better than the old closed source regime.
Oh, you and the article's author are either forgiven or seeing the best in people. Me, on the other hand, who lived the Microsoft with their shady dealings in Bill's / Ballmer's era, I remember their crushing on OEM's to not allow even a shred of openness in their systems. Only because of shifting in developer's in favor of Apple's / Google's Microsoft changed the tune with "Microsoft loves Linux". Bleah! I have no l…
Microsoft always had great developer tech. And having access to that tech more freely (as in on other platforms, partially open source etc) is a significant plus for me.
I loved .net back in 2003 or whatever. Then I never got to use it for years because I was on unix land. It is now open source and multi platform.
They attacked open anything with all their might (and they were fucking mighty) and the enemy still flourished.
Let them come again. If the new strategy is to pump high quality software out in the open, I hope it becomes a long and bloody war.
Re: Cross-compiling binaries for Windows is easier than building natively
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not when you are on Macbook. Don't suggest external drives please ;)
But you don't have to develop on Macbook. So you intentionally chose a platform known for being really expensive and now your main complaint is that it's too expensive? I don't really think that the toolchain is to blame for that one.
> But you don't have to develop on Macbook
Can you please tell that to my IT department which refused to issue me a Linux laptop for 1 month, then took two months to put the order in... I had to get an executive (President of R&D) at the company to harangue IT... I still haven't seen it, apparently they are trying to install the standard "employee spyware" package on it.
Re: Cross-compiling binaries for Windows is easier than building natively
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
Better check those desktop market share numbers.
I suspect if you restrict it to developers the numbers would look very, very different on the stackoverflow survey windows is 41.2%: https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2021#most-popular-...
If you toggle that response to "All Respondents" instead of "Professional Developers" Windows goes up to 45%. Plus, 3% of users are using windows subsystem for Linux. So 48%. Whereas Mac and Linux are both at 25%. Even for developers, Windows is still the clear majority.