[LLVMdev] VC++: Cannot open include file:'windows.h':No suchfileor directory

[Jeff Cohen]

Henrik Bach wrote:

> I agree completely with you, Jeff.
>
> However, I think it somehow would be nice, if you guys could tell 
> comming users that the win32 solution is geared toward VC++ 7.1 (and 
> hence use of other tools are at their own risk).

I've been thinking of writing a "getting started" page for win32.

> And, I think it also would be really cool, if you guys come up with a 
> solution how to handle multiple VC++ x solutions/projects from the 
> same source, possibly ranging from VC 6.0 to future releases.

Like I said, multiple "win32" trees would do it, but again what's the 
rush?  There is exactly one version of VC++ that can build LLVM:  7.1.  
The earlier versions can't compile it at all, and the next version is 
buggy and unreleased and will remain so for some time.

> Another future solution could be that the VC++ x tools get incorparted 
> into the makefile structure, as previously discussed. It appeared to 
> me that the mingw or gunwin32 environment mixed with the VC++ x tools 
> could be a solution.

What problem does this solution solve?  If you have the Microsoft 
toolset, there's no reason to use other toolsets except for specialized 
stuff like parser generators for which Microsoft does not have a tool.  
Furthermore, one set of makefiles is simply not going to handle both GNU 
and Microsoft toolsets.  Creating makefiles just for Windows doesn't 
make much sense as they would only be duplicates of the project files, 
but minus the powerful features of the VS IDE.  I just don't see the 
benefit.

> Henrik.
>
>
> ----Original Message Follows----
> From: Jeff Cohen <jeffc at jolt-lang.org>
> Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 16:28:40 -0800
>
> It's a possibility, though it would be better to create whole separate 
> trees for different versions of VS.  It's not just the project and 
> solutions that need to be kept separate; the object files themselves 
> cannot be mixed between different versions of VS.
>
> There's no rush though.  Trust me, C/C++ programmers will not rush to 
> adopt Whidbey once it's released.  You'd be amazed at the amount of 
> commercial Windows software development that still uses VC++ 6.0 even 
> today.  And that's with 7.1 offering real advantages to C++ 
> programmers over 7.0, which itself had real advantages over 6.0.  I've 
> yet to see anything for us in 8.0.  I can't imagine upgrading before 
> 8.1 or even 9.0, and then with reluctance.
>
> Henrik Bach wrote:
>
>> Hi Jeff and Morten,
>>
>> I was just wondering if below wisdom is true, why not prefix every 
>> solution and project file with VC71 in front of the file name to 
>> signal the case that it is only designed for that specific IDE/tool?
>>
>> This gives us room for comming up with other solution and project 
>> files for another MS specific IDE/tool independt of each other.
>>
>> Henrik.
>>
>>
>> ----Original Message Follows----
>> From: Jeff Cohen <jeffc at jolt-lang.org>
>> Reply-To: jeffc at jolt-lang.org,        LLVM Developers Mailing List 
>> <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>
>> To: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>
>> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] VC++: Cannot open include file: 
>> 'windows.h':No    suchfileor directory
>> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:40:13 -0800
>>
>> Henrik Bach wrote:
>>
>>> ----Original Message Follows----
>>> From: Jeff Cohen <jeffc at jolt-lang.org>
>>> Reply-To: jeffc at jolt-lang.org,        LLVM Developers Mailing List 
>>> <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>
>>> To: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>
>>> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] VC++: Cannot open include file: 'windows.h': 
>>> No    suchfileor directory
>>> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:05:39 -0800
>>>
>>>> Out of curiosity, did it accept the solution and project files as 
>>>> is, or did it want to "upgrade" >them?  If the latter, I cannot 
>>>> accept any patches for those files because they would break VC++ 
>>>> >7.1 (which in turn broke 7.0, which in turn broke 6.x).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> No, it didn't take the project files out of the box. It insisted to 
>>> upgrade the soulution and project files.
>>>
>>> Henrik.
>>
>>
>>
>> Groan...  it's bad enough they keep breaking backwards compatibility, 
>> but what's much worse is that the upgrade is never 100% correct.  
>> Builds are broken in subtle and hard to track down ways.  It's why VS 
>> upgrades get put off for as long as possible.  I won't even think of 
>> upgrading to Whidbey until several years after its release.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
>> http://mail.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Del din verden med MSN Spaces  http://spaces.msn.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
>> http://mail.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://mail.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Find det, du søger på MSN Søg http://search.msn.dk
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://mail.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>
>