win32/msvc source-level support status and future

Create issue
Issue #119 resolved
Former user created an issue

edit: more specific, discussion of *snprintf removed. See #22

the WIN32 macro seems to have meant different things at different times and to different developers. It should be reviewed to really mean the platform in general (or otherwise be given a clear definition and purpose), and compiler-specific macros should probably replace it in some cases. This overlaps with issue #94.

I consider MSVC source-level support somewhat low priority: mingw/msys are better than they were there is no build support for msvc anyway * there are close to zero users compiling asss with msvc

Comments (6)

  1. Former user Account Deleted

    Bug #22 seems a rather trivial issue to completely remove a (decent, modern) compiler over.

    It's true that MSVC isn't supported with the build scripts, but it's not that difficult to get asss compiled without them if you know your way around the IDE and can get all the dependencies.

    Can we just leave bug #22 in place for MSVC with a few well placed #defines?

  2. Former user Account Deleted
    1. 22 is a crash and potential security problem, though admittedly rarely seen and mostly unexploitable. Almost all the uses of [v]snprintf are wrong, and assume broken _[v]snprintf return value semantics. It seems better not to leave in a subtle bug for the sake of a minority compiler. I don't want to be testing something else new and run into this problem. asss compiles with mingw/msys, so windows is not unsupported; I can make a windows release when ready.

    I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "leave #22 in place". I'd rather fix it and break MSVC, and deal with _that_ when someone really cares, or better yet let someone who wants msvc add build support and *snprintf properly. It shouldn't be too hard, but I'd rather try to get away with deferring it until #94 is addressed. MSVC (note not C++) is almost de-facto deprecated. MS basically waves its middle finger at (portable) C because it's used so much more for open source. Go look for their reasons for not supporting C99 and see if you buy them.

  3. Former user Account Deleted
    • edited description

    edited description. I will close #22 in a way that (probably, untested) doesn't break msvc. My general feeling towards msvc remains.

  4. Log in to comment