mingwrap -> mingcc

Dimitrie O. Paun dpaun at rogers.com
Wed Dec 18 15:00:21 CST 2002


On December 18, 2002 03:36 pm, Francois Gouget wrote:
> Shouldn't we have 'wine' somewhere in the name to avoid possible
> conflicts? Of course it would be nice to also have something that
> reminds of mingw so that we can later have other wrappers for Visual
> C++, Borland C++, etc. (if the need arises, I don't see it right now)
>
> So:
>   wcc

I suggest this one initially, but Alexandre objected (rightfully so)
that it is too generic. It's a nice name, but we might need wrappers
for different things in the future, and it does not scale.

Besides, we want the name to say that we make gcc look like MinGW.

>   wgcc

This one can work too, not bad. In fact, I like it: short, and to
the point. The MinGW compiler is still called gcc, so this works
out very nicely.

>   wincc
>   wingcc

Long, and undescriptive. I'd say no.

>   winecc

Too generic, it's the same (but longer :)) as wcc.

>   winegcc

Why not wgcc?

>   wmingcc

This can work too.

So I am OK with the following:
  wgcc
  mingcc
  wmingcc

Probably wgcc is the nicest, shortest, and maybe most easily recognizable
for people. Alexandre, if renaming is acceptable, take your pick! :)

just s/mingcc/<your pick>/g into the patch...

-- 
Dimi.




More information about the wine-devel mailing list