U++ forum: Welcome to the forum

Status & Roadmap

Authors & License

Funding Ultimate++

Search on this site

Search in forums

Home » Developing U++ » U++ Developers corner » Considering different approach to Win32 release

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Return to the default flat view

Create a new topic

Submit Reply

Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release [message #45300 is a reply to message #45297]

Thu, 29 October 2015 09:42

Tom1
Messages: 1212
Registered: March 2007

Senior Contributor

Hi Mirek,

I have now tested 9105 on Windows 8.1 Professional x64 with the following results:

1. From my point of view MSC9 and MSC10 both work perfectly OK now.

2. It still can't find the installed Visual studio 2015 community edition. Is this expected?

3. MINGW Debug compiles UWord correctly and the resulting executable works.

4. MINGW Size compiles UWord correctly and the resulting executable works.

5. MINGW Optimal compiles UWord but the resulting executable crashes. It requires dropping the speed optimization flag from O3 to O2 in order to make it work.

6. MINGW Speed compiles UWord but the resulting executable crashes. It requires dropping the speed optimization flag from O3 to O2 in order to make it work.

7. MINGWx64 Debug compiles UWord correctly and the resulting executable works.

8. MINGWx64 Size compiles UWord but the resulting executable crashes. (Switching from Os to e.g. O0 in size optimization flags fixes the executable.)

9. MINGWx64 Optimal compiles UWord but the resulting executable crashes. (Switching from Os to O0, O1, O2 or O3 in size optimization flags fixes the executable.)

10. MINGWx64 Speed compiles UWord correctly and the resulting executable works.

Best regards,

Tom

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

[Message index]

		Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Sun, 20 September 2015 19:10
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: dolik.rce on Sun, 20 September 2015 20:31
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: Didier on Sun, 20 September 2015 21:57
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Sun, 20 September 2015 23:36
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: dolik.rce on Mon, 21 September 2015 07:27
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: timsky on Mon, 21 September 2015 15:58
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: koldo on Mon, 21 September 2015 16:14
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Wed, 21 October 2015 20:30
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: Tom1 on Mon, 26 October 2015 09:51
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Mon, 26 October 2015 12:23
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: Tom1 on Mon, 26 October 2015 15:01
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: Tom1 on Mon, 26 October 2015 15:26
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Mon, 26 October 2015 18:59
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: Tom1 on Tue, 27 October 2015 09:20
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Tue, 27 October 2015 11:00
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: cbpporter on Tue, 27 October 2015 11:26
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: cbpporter on Tue, 27 October 2015 12:25
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: Tom1 on Tue, 27 October 2015 12:48
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Wed, 28 October 2015 07:58
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: Tom1 on Wed, 28 October 2015 08:06
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: cbpporter on Wed, 28 October 2015 10:53
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: cbpporter on Wed, 28 October 2015 11:10
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: cbpporter on Wed, 28 October 2015 11:32
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: Mindtraveller on Wed, 28 October 2015 16:39
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: cbpporter on Wed, 28 October 2015 16:48
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Wed, 28 October 2015 19:20
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: cbpporter on Thu, 29 October 2015 09:30
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Thu, 29 October 2015 13:13
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: cbpporter on Thu, 29 October 2015 13:43
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: Tom1 on Thu, 29 October 2015 09:42
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Thu, 29 October 2015 13:22
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: Tom1 on Thu, 29 October 2015 14:17
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Thu, 29 October 2015 14:22
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: Tom1 on Thu, 29 October 2015 14:33
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Thu, 29 October 2015 15:04
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: cbpporter on Thu, 29 October 2015 15:26
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: Tom1 on Thu, 29 October 2015 15:48
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Thu, 29 October 2015 16:45
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Thu, 29 October 2015 16:46
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: Tom1 on Thu, 29 October 2015 18:18
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Thu, 29 October 2015 20:16
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: cbpporter on Fri, 30 October 2015 10:13
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Fri, 30 October 2015 12:17
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: Tom1 on Fri, 30 October 2015 14:39
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Fri, 30 October 2015 17:05
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: Tom1 on Fri, 30 October 2015 17:51
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Mon, 02 November 2015 17:17
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Mon, 02 November 2015 17:34
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: Tom1 on Mon, 26 October 2015 15:34
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Mon, 26 October 2015 18:58
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: Tom1 on Tue, 27 October 2015 09:01
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: cbpporter on Tue, 27 October 2015 10:29
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Tue, 27 October 2015 10:45
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: cbpporter on Tue, 27 October 2015 10:55
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Wed, 28 October 2015 07:57
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: cbpporter on Tue, 27 October 2015 10:39
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Tue, 27 October 2015 10:59
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mdelfede on Mon, 02 November 2015 18:10
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: Tom1 on Tue, 03 November 2015 09:27
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Tue, 03 November 2015 09:48
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: Tom1 on Tue, 03 November 2015 11:33
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Wed, 25 November 2015 13:14
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mirek on Tue, 03 November 2015 09:52
		Re: Considering different approach to Win32 release By: mdelfede on Thu, 26 November 2015 09:35

Previous Topic:	mingw/gdb troubles
Next Topic:	Ideas on U++ as library

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

PDF

]

Current Time: Sun May 05 01:40:03 CEST 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.04272 seconds