RE: [XaraXtreme-dev] Supporting different OS than Linux, Win32,and Mac OS X?

["Paul F. Johnson" <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

> > I would *imagine* that as long as there is a port of 
> > wxWidgets for the target that a port can be done.
> 
> The chances are that it will take very little effort to compile the
> codebase on *BSD/x86, other processor architechures will take more work.

I would have thought that there are three limiting factors

1. That there is a wx port for any given platform (and remember, they
have legacy versions for OS/2 and even Win(8*2))
2. That there is a standards compliant C++ compiler available for said
platform [1]
3. The processor in use. For example, ARM processors (which includes the
likes of the X-Scale range), while damned fast in operation, don't have
FP (okay, some do, but not many). That would mean processor intensive
code which a machine with FP on doesn't think twice about, will require
a large-ish amount of work to ensure a decent level of speed.

> Endian and 64bit issues are very likely, due to the large amount of
> legacy code. Having said that the actual rendering component has been
> made endian clean, which took remarkably little effort.

Endian clean is not as difficult as it's cracked up to be. It can be
performed with effectively a couple of #defines and a smattering of
#if/#else/#endif compounds.

Different bit processors are causing quite a few problems. Even the
chaps over at Novell and Redhat wince!

TTFN

Paul

[1] Yes, I am aware that the term "standards compliant C++ compiler" is
pretty meaningless given that there isn't one available!
-- 
"Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" -
Dr Who