Python 2.4 killing commercial Windows Python development ?

["Martin v. Löwis"]

Peter Hansen wrote:
>> The last I recall reading in this forum was that the regular
>> distribution is compiled with a copy of the compiler
>> *provided by* Microsoft.
[...]
> By 'provided by' I meant *donated by*, as in given
> free (apparently) to the PSF or at least to one of
> the core developers for the purpose of compiling
> Python itself.

Just for the record: While I do have received such a copy,
this copy isn't actually used to build the binaries. Instead,
I use a copy of the compiler that my employer has licensed
(not that this matters much).

I cannot personally see much difference between using VC6
or VC7.1. One key reason for me to push the change for VC7.1
is that VC7.1 has updated SDK headers, which in turn means
that Python 2.4 supports IPv6 (which wasn't really possible
with VC6). Also, many people who build Python extensions
cannot get a copy of VC6 anymore (because MS stopped selling
it), so if Python was built with VC6, many people could
not build Python extensions.

I cannot see much of a difference because Python would have
to include the CRT in *either* case - whether it is mscvrt4.dll,
or msvc71.dll. Neither of these DLLs is guaranteeed to be
shipped with the operating system; that people got away with
not distributing mscvrt4.dll is only because so much other
software distributes it that it is available on virtually
every system. I predict the same will happen with mscvr71.dll
over time (and then with the CRT that will be shipped with
the next release of VC).

Regards,
Martin