User forums > General (but related to Code::Blocks)
pro's and pre's of compilers
Vampyre_Dark:
--- Quote from: thomas ---By using and supporting MSVC, you prove them correct and further the development of incorrect software. At the same time, you prevent others from writing correct code because they must take VC into account.
--- End quote ---
Fud based on old info. The new VC++ since 2002~2003 is 98% standards compliant.
(And yes, OpenGL rules)
Anonymous:
--- Quote from: Vampyre_Dark ---
--- Quote from: thomas ---By using and supporting MSVC, you prove them correct and further the development of incorrect software. At the same time, you prevent others from writing correct code because they must take VC into account.
--- End quote ---
Fud based on old info. The new VC++ since 2002~2003 is 98% standards compliant.
(And yes, OpenGL rules)
--- End quote ---
He was mainly referring to VC6. The wxWidgets devs have to make all changes in the library backwards compatible to MSVC6, hence the custom classes (which since wx2.6.0 inherit from their STL counterparts by default) and no-template code in general.
thomas:
--- Quote from: Vampyre_Dark on June 25, 2005, 12:57:03 pm ---it's all in VC++ format, and you have to port it over, or rely on someone else porting it over, such as DirectX
--- End quote ---
Uh... Direct what? :?
No seriously, for DirectX and dotNet, the Microsoft tools are of course unbeatable. No doubt.
But for everything I want to use, and every application I want to develop gcc is the choice. Sorry, but VC simply lacks the coolness factor of gcc in many respects. And OpenGL is better than DirectX anyway :)
Ceniza:
Heh, you're replying to a post on June 25 with a post on August 16...
--- Quote from: Urxae ---...and I think also Mac OS X, but I'm not sure about the last one.
--- End quote ---
Yep, GCC is also there, it's like... everywhere.
Most compilers are close to be 100% ISO C++ standard compliant nowdays. That's something you shouldn't worry about if you're getting an up-to-date compiler.
Digital Mars is really speedy compiling but still needs more "support" (I was unable to get a monolithic and shared wxWidgets without debugging with it) and it's free.
Visual C++ is also fast compiling and a good choice if you're going to focus just on Windows development. If you want to get the most of it you must pay (to stay legal).
Intel C++ is considered to be the best compiler generating binary code. It's available for both Windows and Linux. If want to use it under Linux you can get a free license for non-commercial use. For Windows you need Visual C++ and you need to pay for a license.
GCC, just like I said before, is basically everywhere. It generates nice binary code and is free. Its pitfall, as you have said, is compiling time. It's maybe the slowest C++ compiler, even though it's kinda speedy for C.
For me GCC gets the job done... with time.
GCC 4.0.x looks really promising (with the new C++ parser and SSA) but is still buggy and GCC 4.1.x looks even more promising (with the new C parser) with its first release almost out.
Cannot comment about Borland 'cause the only C/C++ compiler I've used made by them was Turbo C++, and it's really really REALLY old (nice to start learning and has a nice debugger).
Well, that's all I have to say before I fall asleep.
Vampyre_Dark:
--- Quote from: thomas on August 16, 2005, 10:03:44 pm ---
--- Quote from: Vampyre_Dark on June 25, 2005, 12:57:03 pm ---it's all in VC++ format, and you have to port it over, or rely on someone else porting it over, such as DirectX
--- End quote ---
Uh... Direct what? :?
No seriously, for DirectX and dotNet, the Microsoft tools are of course unbeatable. No doubt.
But for everything I want to use, and every application I want to develop gcc is the choice. Sorry, but VC simply lacks the coolness factor of gcc in many respects. And OpenGL is better than DirectX anyway :)
--- End quote ---
Like I said before. I use OpenGL for rendering, but I use DirectInput and DirectSound too. OpenGL is only a rendering library. DirectX can't be directly compared, as it offers a ton of other stuff, Direct3D being the rendering api. I tried using other things before, SDL and others, but they didn't mesaure up IMO and I'm no longer a fan of the restricted xgpl, so I don't agree to their licensing terms.
What coolness factor? What's cool about a compiler? You use the tool that meets your needs. MinGW met mine for a few years, but it was time to move on for my own needs. It's a personal choice.
btw, dotnet can go #%&*($#% :)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version