[Gdal-dev] Proposal for Unified Windows Binaries

[Joaquim Luis]

Mateusz Loskot wrote:
> Frank Warmerdam wrote:
>   
>> Howard Butler wrote:
>>     
>>> I think an "official" Windows GDAL release should have the following
>>> traits:
>>> - All optional drivers built as plugins and all other drivers built in
>>> - No scripting bindings
>>> - No Python utilities
>>> - Include the .lib files
>>>       
>> Howard,
>>
>> Presumably it would also include the include files?  By .lib files to you
>> just mean the stub library for the DLL or static libraries as well?  I'd
>> rather avoid static libraries which are much harder to arrange on windows
>> when there are dependencies, and where are very sensitive to difference in
>> compiler version, and build options.  The C API used from a DLL should be
>> fairly save across compiler versions and mixes of build options.
>>
>> So where do we go from here?  Should we get Mateusz to prepare initial
>> binaries for 1.4.1 based on the suggested pattern?
>>     
>
> Folks,
>
> What compiler should we use to prepare official binaries for Windows?
>
> I have only legal copy of Visual C++ 2005 Professional.
> I don't have 2003 or may be I could have it if we are OK to use Visual
> C++ 2003 Toolkig (already deprecated by Microsoft).
> Unfortunately, I don't have any access to Visual C++ 6.0.
>   

Hi,
Have you considered using Intel compilers?
Here you can get a 1 month working demo.
http://www3.intel.com/cd/software/products/asmo-na/eng/compilers/cwin/279578.htm

A test case that I'm working with showed a dramatic reduction in running 
time using this compiler.
from 2 min 50 sec (exe compiled with MSVC6) to 1:50

Joaquim Luis