Closed mateuszviste closed 1 year ago
Good question. In my opinion, because the Borland tools are proprietary stuff, support could be dropped. But I do not want to decide this by myself. There is one advantage in supporting multiple compilers: chances to catch errors are higher. Perhaps @PerditionC and the others may give their opinion here.
I like to be able to build FreeDOS software with Watcom and Gcc-ia16 as both have cross compiler variants available for Linux and so can be added to Github's CI for a Linux based build. One thing though, I don't see any advantage in having builds that use each compiler's specific make, I'd just prefer to standardise on Gnu make for all builds. That said, I don't have much time at the moment for FreeDOS or Dosemu, so whomever does the work gets to choose, and for the moment, that's not me. :smile:
I would like to be able to build it under DosBox with only OpenWatcom installed. Therefore I prefer to having an OpenWatcom Makefile. But nothing speaks against an additional GNU Makefile :-)
Regarding a GCC-IA16 port, there is already #23. Will be a big task and I am not sure it will happen anytime soon. But we should keep it in mind when adding new code, namely try to not introduce more vendor specific code.
In the light of having an additional compiler in the future I think it is ok to break with the Borland support.
Borland support is removed, now that FDISK compiles with IA16-GCC, we have a second open source compiler. This should be enough.
FDISK comes with Makefiles for OpenWatcom and Borland.
Is there a reason to look over two builds? Sticking to one (preferably OW?) would make it less of a nuisance for developers to take care of the code. Not that I am particularly concerned of course. It's truly an open question.