Re: Result: Octave-UPM on Windows :-(

[Jacob Dawid]

> I think it does not matter whether one or the other compiler
> produces better code (although that is arguable and you will find
> "benchmarks" to prove either one or the other opinion), but it is very
> important GNU Octave can be brought to other platforms with mere free
> software. Using Visual Studio would undermine this.

Using Visual Studio does not stop anyone from compiling the GUI using any
other compiler (free or proprietary). About using the GUI, compiling
with Visual Studio requires users to install some proprietary external
libraries. But target users are already in Windows, a proprietary
OS. So users can decide installing the libraries, or compiling by
themselves using any other compiler, or even switching to a free
platform where Octave is also available. I don't see how VS can
undermine anything.

The problem is that we are collecting experience with using VS and by doing that we promote non-free software. The users following our path will then "find it easier to compile with VS", as you already mentioned, because developers have done the prework on a VS-friendly environment to compile GNU Octave. So the problem lies more in *not-using MinGW* than in *using VS*.