XPost: comp.os.linux.advocacy   
   From: no_zeke@fake-zeke.com   
      
   "Lawrence D'Oliveiro"  wrote in message   
   news:ifbvsm$m7d$10@lust.ihug.co.nz...   
   > In message , Ezekiel wrote:   
   >   
   >> "Lawrence D'Oliveiro"  wrote in message   
   >> news:ifb9he$9a4$6@lust.ihug.co.nz...   
   >>   
   >>> In message <4d12859d$0$11583$ec3e2dad@unlimited.usenetmonster.com>,   
   >>> amicus_curious wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> ... gcc [is] crap and ... woefully inadequate for creating any sort of   
   >>>> software today.   
   >>>   
   >>> Odd you should say that, since GCC is a crucial component in the fact   
   >>> that so much Free Software is available and supported on two dozen   
   >>> different major processor architectures. Basically, if GCC will compile   
   >>> for it, Linux   
   >>> and other Free Software will run on it.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>> Contrast Microsoft's Visual Studio tools, which are confined to just one   
   >>> measly architecture.   
   >>   
   >> Another ignoramous who's making claims about things he knows absolutely   
   >> nothing about.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>    
   >> Targeting Windows CE processors for native Visual Studio 2005 projects   
   >>   
   >> The Windows CE 5.0 SDK provides support for targeting the following   
   >> instruction sets:   
   >>   
   >> .ARMV4I   
   >> .MIPSII   
   >> .MIPSII_FP   
   >> .MIPSIV   
   >> .MIPSIV_FP   
   >> .SH4   
   >> .x86   
   >>    
   >   
      
   > What a tiny selection.   
      
   The only thing tiny here is your knowledge.  This "tiny" selection of 7   
   different processors is MORE than enough to show that your claim is complete   
   and utter nonsense. You know... the ignorant claim you made of -   
   "Microsoft's Visual Studio tools, which are confined to just *ONE* measly   
   architecture."   
      
   Once again you have no idea what you're talking about.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)