Intel Prepping OS X/Intel Development tools
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1851752,00.asp
particularly interesting is this bit:
"Smith said that the tools will contain the same feature set that Intel now provides for its Windows and Linux development tools.
"We will offer one set of tools for all OSes," said Smith."
Things are getting interesting ..
particularly interesting is this bit:
"Smith said that the tools will contain the same feature set that Intel now provides for its Windows and Linux development tools.
"We will offer one set of tools for all OSes," said Smith."
Things are getting interesting ..
Comments
Originally posted by ThinkingDifferent
I am not sure why an Apple developer will want to pay for the Intel's plugins. XTools provide a comprehensive set of dev tools for free.
Seriously though - Xcode is simply fantastic. One point of consideration, however, is that Intel may advertise their compiler as producing faster binaries on x86 hardware than GCC / Xcode.
Originally posted by semi-fly
Seriously though - Xcode is simply fantastic. One point of consideration, however, is that Intel may advertise their compiler as producing faster binaries on x86 hardware than GCC / Xcode.
IBM's compiler is reported to be superior to GCC. How many OSX Developers use it?
Originally posted by ThinkingDifferent
IBM's compiler is reported to be superior to GCC. How many OSX Developers use it?
Apple urges developers of PPC high performance apps to write their code using IBM's XL compilers.
Originally posted by Mr. Me
Apple urges developers of PPC high performance apps to write their code using IBM's XL compilers.
Back in '97 we wanted to migrate from XLC to GCC because of licensing costs. We had a huge code repository that had to be recompiled. After recompiling the code in our dev environment we found some code no longer worked. We ended up staying with XLC. This was in a RS600 environment.
Originally posted by ThinkingDifferent
Back in '97 we wanted to migrate from XLC to GCC because of licensing costs. We had a huge code repository that had to be recompiled. After recompiling the code in our dev environment we found some code no longer worked. We ended up staying with XLC. This was in a RS600 environment.
Isn't a single lincense for XL currently $600.00-$700.00?
Originally posted by semi-fly
Isn't a single lincense for XL currently $600.00-$700.00?
At that time we had about 100 developers.
Originally posted by ThinkingDifferent
I am not sure why an Apple developer will want to pay for the Intel's plugins. XTools provide a comprehensive set of dev tools for free.
You're right, of course; XCode etc is free and fabulous and the more people discover them, the better. But I'm not thinking about the 'Apple developer' per se. I'm thinking of shops with a casual interest in the platform, and the credibility that a set of compilers from no less a name than Intel will lend to the platform. Just another wave on the sea of change these days in Apple-land .. all adding up in terms of mindshare, and, let's hope, marketshare.
Fun times ahead ..
Originally posted by lanky_nathan
You're right, of course; XCode etc is free and fabulous and the more people discover them, the better. But I'm not thinking about the 'Apple developer' per se. I'm thinking of shops with a casual interest in the platform, and the credibility that a set of compilers from no less a name than Intel will lend to the platform. Just another wave on the sea of change these days in Apple-land .. all adding up in terms of mindshare, and, let's hope, marketshare.
Fun times ahead ..
You seem to be under the impression that Xcode is difficult for the novice whereas other IDEs are easier. Not so.
Originally posted by Mr. Me
You seem to be under the impression that Xcode is difficult for the novice whereas other IDEs are easier. Not so.
You took this from "XCode is free and fabulous, and the more people discover it, the better" ?
Anyway .. I think this thread has outlived any usefulness it may ever had had :-)
Back to PowerBook G5 speculation, heh.
Originally posted by ThinkingDifferent
At that time we had about 100 developers.
Ouch -
Originally posted by ThinkingDifferent
At that time we had about 100 developers.
When you reach that number of developers, I always recommend that you use some sort of SCM.
Originally posted by Hugi
When you reach that number of developers, I always recommend that you use some sort of SCM.
Which still doesn't alleviate the need for compiler licenses. At the time we were using RCS but they have since migrated to PVCS.
Originally posted by ThinkingDifferent
Which still doesn't alleviate the need for compiler licenses. At the time we were using RCS but they have since migrated to PVCS.
Of course, It was just meant as a joke.
Originally posted by lanky_nathan
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1851752,00.asp
particularly interesting is this bit:
"Smith said that the tools will contain the same feature set that Intel now provides for its Windows and Linux development tools.
"We will offer one set of tools for all OSes," said Smith."
Things are getting interesting ..
Doesn't this mean that it will be easier to port applications? In theory anyway.
Originally posted by semi-fly
Seriously though - Xcode is simply fantastic. One point of consideration, however, is that Intel may advertise their compiler as producing faster binaries on x86 hardware than GCC / Xcode.
In that case developers could use ICC / Xcode, isn't it?
Currently Xcode on PowerPC supports XLC, so I would expect it to support the Intel compiler on the Intel platform.
Intel's compilers will be awesome on OS X x86, It will make OS X very very snappy.