Metrowerks Announces CodeWarrior will NOT SUPPORT Intel

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

jonhoyle@mac.com - 29 Jul 2005 20:13 GMT

Put a fork in them. They're done.

On the bright side, they will be open sourcing PowerPlant

Jonathan Hoyle
Eastman Kodak

Reply to this Message

Lyndsey.Ferguson@gmail.com - 29 Jul 2005 20:22 GMT

Is there a link to the announcment or can you summarize the roadmap?

Reply to this Message

Avi Drissman - 29 Jul 2005 20:46 GMT

> Is there a link to the announcment or can you summarize the roadmap?

My notes:

http://www.drissman.com/blog/archives/2005/07/29/the_codewarrior_roadmap.html

Avi

Signature

Avi Drissman avi@drissman.com
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
http://avi.drissman.com/
Argh! My news server is trunca

Reply to this Message

larry@skytag.com - 29 Jul 2005 23:36 GMT

> Like Linux, wrap GCC?
> - Not technically impossible, and we already have that kind of stuff
> in-house. But you aren't going to see it. There is a GCC adapter
> sample in the CW SDK.

Does the GCC adapter sample let you wrap GCC yourself?

Larry

Reply to this Message

Avi Drissman - 01 Aug 2005 00:01 GMT

On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 16:36:54 -0700, larry wrote:

> Does the GCC adapter sample let you wrap GCC yourself?

I don't know, but that seemed to be implied by the answer. I don't have a
copy of the SDK handy to look at.

Avi

Signature

Avi Drissman avi@drissman.com
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
http://avi.drissman.com/
Argh! My news server is trunca

Reply to this Message

MW Ron - 01 Aug 2005 14:56 GMT

>> Like Linux, wrap GCC?
>> - Not technically impossible, and we already have that kind of stuff
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
>Larry

There is a Pascal developer that has adapted the GNU Pascal to
CodeWarrior. There previously was another developer that had created
several GNU cross compilers for use with CodeWarrior. Those were based
upon the GCC Adaptor. I do not know what level of expertise it takes
for these to work, if the adaptor was really close or just a hint for a
compiler expert.

Ron

Signature

CodeWarrior Community Forum is a free online resource for developers
to discuss CodeWarrior topics with other users and our staff
-- http://www.codewarrior.com/community --

Ron Liechty - MWRon@metrowerks.com - http://www.codewarrior.com

Reply to this Message

Paul - 01 Aug 2005 15:25 GMT

> >> Like Linux, wrap GCC?
> >> - Not technically impossible, and we already have that kind of stuff
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> for these to work, if the adaptor was really close or just a hint for a
> compiler expert.

I did an adapter for Tribeworks' Eiffel compiler a few years ago. I actually
implemented it as a linker, since it wanted to generate byte code and add it
into a shred library project. It had its problems but was hugely better than
the alternative at the time (MPW and Visual Studio.) Didn't have to support
debugging, though, and that's likely to be a problem with any such addon.

Reply to this Message

larry@skytag.com - 29 Jul 2005 23:40 GMT

Is there some reason this announcement had to wait for AdHoc, or were
they just waiting as long as they could before making the obvious bad
news official?

Larry

Reply to this Message

Scott Ribe - 29 Jul 2005 23:53 GMT

> Is there some reason this announcement had to wait for AdHoc, or were
> they just waiting as long as they could before making the obvious bad
> news official?

Not stated, but sort of implied, that it was a bit of a fight to get
management to agree to go ahead and finish up a CW 10 and release it.

Reply to this Message

brandon - 30 Jul 2005 04:06 GMT

So we basically got the same message that Ron said initially and later
retracted.

Glad i didn't wait to start looking for alternatives.

Reply to this Message

MW Ron - 01 Aug 2005 14:54 GMT

>So we basically got the same message that Ron said initially and later
>retracted.
>
>Glad i didn't wait to start looking for alternatives.

Let me explain that. My first was based on our selling our Intel
technology. Then we looked at the viability of using GCC or Intel as a
plugin for CodeWarrior to support this (Just as we had used Apple's
compilers and linkers for CW 6's Mach-O tools).

It however was determined to end CodeWarrior for Mac by keeping it just
for PowerPC and adding some long asked for features as a good will
gestue to our customers.

Ron

Signature

Reply to this Message

Alwyn - 01 Aug 2005 15:34 GMT

> It however was determined to end CodeWarrior for Mac by keeping it just
> for PowerPC and adding some long asked for features as a good will
> gestue to our customers.

That's entirely reasonable. I have to ask, though: Will there be
maintenance updates of CodeWarrior 10? If not, I suspect people will
find it less worthwhile.

Alwyn

Reply to this Message

Ron L - 01 Aug 2005 17:18 GMT

In article
<dt015a1979-A68760.15340501082005@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,

>> It however was determined to end CodeWarrior for Mac by keeping it just
>> for PowerPC and adding some long asked for features as a good will
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>maintenance updates of CodeWarrior 10? If not, I suspect people will
>find it less worthwhile.

I would expect that there will be a couple point releases that are
normal after any release. I do not expect major updates would be
required nor would they be done for any OS System change.

Ron

Signature

Reply to this Message

Sean McBride - 01 Aug 2005 02:48 GMT

> Is there some reason this announcement had to wait for AdHoc, or were
> they just waiting as long as they could before making the obvious bad
> news official?

Am I the only one that sees the good news here? I mean, ok, it's bad
that CW Mac is going away and all, but we *are* getting CW 9.6 & 10, and
PP, PPX, Constructor are being open-sourced. It's much better than what
a lot of posters here were predicting!

For years now I've been using both CW and PB/Xcode, and while each has
pros/cons, when using Xcode I mostly miss CW!

So CW won't be making the Intel transition, but until Intel is
everywhere, CW will be a valuable workhorse, and will stave off having
to use Xcode until it hopefully sucks less in the future.

Thanks Josef & Ron for pushing for all this!!!

Reply to this Message

larry@skytag.com - 02 Aug 2005 08:09 GMT

> Am I the only one that sees the good news here? I mean, ok, it's bad
> that CW Mac is going away and all, but we *are* getting CW 9.6 & 10, and
> PP, PPX, Constructor are being open-sourced. It's much better than what
> a lot of posters here were predicting!

These are nice, but I don't use PP, PPx, or Constructor, and the end of
CW still spells misery to me. It means I have to learn to use a new
development environment, that development environment is Xcode, and I
have to convert my project over to Xcode which I can honesty say does
not sound like fun. Okay, so I may be able to put that off for a while,
but if someone comes up with a way to compile for Intel using CW 10,
then I'll be happier.

> For years now I've been using both CW and PB/Xcode, and while each has
> pros/cons, when using Xcode I mostly miss CW!

I'm sure. But frankly, I won't be surprised if we see Intel boxes
announced at Macworld in January, and from a marketing standpoint,
being able to tell your customers that you have an Intel-native
application is good for business.

> So CW won't be making the Intel transition, but until Intel is
> everywhere, CW will be a valuable workhorse, and will stave off having
> to use Xcode until it hopefully sucks less in the future.

This has certainly been *my* plan. ;-)

Larry

Reply to this Message

MW Ron - 01 Aug 2005 14:58 GMT

>Is there some reason this announcement had to wait for AdHoc, or were
>they just waiting as long as they could before making the obvious bad
>news official?
>
>Larry

Pricing and timelines and I failed to get a good pricing although I
will post a price as soon as possible.

Ron

Signature

Reply to this Message

MW Ron - 01 Aug 2005 14:50 GMT

>Is there a link to the announcment or can you summarize the roadmap?

Avi's post is pretty close, I'll start another thread. I'm sorry I
didn't post sooner my laptop broke.

Ron

Signature

Reply to this Message

MW Ron - 01 Aug 2005 14:49 GMT

>Put a fork in them. They're done.

I certainly would not say that, it is more like we are going to have one
big thank you for all of our users before we leave.

>On the bright side, they will be open sourcing PowerPlant

There are many bright sides. (My Mac laptop broke the day before
MacHack, the Dell I had to take broke at MacHack).

Ron

Signature

Reply to this Message

Mac Forum / Programming / CodeWarrior / August 2005

Metrowerks Announces CodeWarrior will NOT SUPPORT Intel