Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from September 2011
On 1 September 2011 20:52, Steve Hay <steve.m.hay@googlemail.com> wrote: > On 1 September 2011 19:17, Konovalov, Vadim (Vadim)** CTR ** > <vadim.konovalov@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote: >>> From: Jan Dubois >>> On Thu, 01 Sep 2011, David Golden wrote: >>> > On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 9:20 AM, Steve Hay >>> <SteveHay@planit.com> wrote: >>> > > Unless someone with a recent, full version of "C++ Builder" can tell >>> > > us that *that* works, and is willing to help maintain it in the >>> > > future, then it now seems pointless to me to carry on with just that >>> > > old free version, especially given that Microsoft have been making >>> > > all their compilers freely available for a long time now. >>> > >>> > +1 >>> >>> +1 from me too. I've said for many years that I don't care about >>> the old Borland compiler, and that it is only supported because >>> Steve cares about it. I don't think it serves any useful purpose, >>> given that we have GCC as a free compiler option that works well. >> >> I value possibility to have a perl built with Borland C++ builder, >> and I even used it many times in some 5.005_xx versions. >> >> Now I do not interested in it anymore, for a long time already, >> and I do know that this is a compiler in problem, and borland itself >> just don't have enough support of their own compiler now, (and >> borland do not even exist) >> >> but it still gives a >> >> -1 >> >> from me :) >> although very minor one :) >> > > Looks like the consensus is to axe it, so I will initiate the Borland > Chainsaw Massacre in the next few days :-) > Now committed as 378eeda70c.Thread Previous | Thread Next