[Gdal-dev] Proposal for Unified Windows Binaries

[Mateusz Loskot]

Joaquim Luis wrote:
> 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
> 
Joaquim,

I used it for Windows CE platform and it wasn't much better than
eMbedded Visual C++ 4.0 (the same compiler as Visual C++ 6.0).
It was like 1:1.

> 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

It's not a surprise, because Visual C++ 6.0 is a dinosaur and it doesn't
fit well to modern CPUs regarding optimization.

Have you tried Visual C++ 8.0 or at least 7.1?

Another subject is that it costs ~400 USD or so :-)

Cheers
-- 
Mateusz Loskot
http://mateusz.loskot.net