Why can't it find iostream?

[buzzbee]

Hi,

Basically I have included errors!

I've downloaded 'codeblocks-1.0rc2_mingw.exe' and installed it as administrator on vista. I've used the wizard for a basic console app (a little hello world cout thing). Then pressed F9 to compile and run, but i'm given errors stating 'iostream: No such file or directory'. I've added various directories (ones containing and up from) to these dialogs:

Settings -> Compiler ....
   Linker
   Directories
      - Compiler
      - Linker
      - Resource compiler

Still no joy. Why?


Also I previously had the problem of code blocks not finding 'cc1plus.exe', so I added to one of those directories also that path...

I'm generally a nix user so i'm frustrated being in whinney anyway and it's all just too helpful for me... Help!

[thomas]

Vista is not compatible with the version of MinGW that was bundled with RC2. Newer versions of MinGW work around the Vista plague.

I don't know if Vista is compatible with RC2, there might be additional problems ahead. You might want to use a real operating system or a more recent version of Code::Blocks which contains workarounds for Vista.

[buzzbee]

I only downloaded it last night!

Vista came on my laptop and that's all I have here, and what I need to do can't be done on anything other than whinney, otherwise i'd not have rebooted... I only kept it for games (not that I really play them anymore!). I'm just wanting to have a look at a few templates provided by irrWizard and i've already wasted almost 2hrs!

[thomas]

Well, as I said, the newer versions of MinGW have workarounds for Vista.
Go to http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=2435 and either download the 3.4 files with -vista, or one of the two 4.2 versions (either sjlj or dw2) which both have Vista workarounds, too.

While the download is running, send send your hate mail regarding the deliberate breaking of software compatibility to:
William Gates
c/o
Microsoft Corporation
One Microsoft Way
Redmond, WA 98052-6399

[buzzbee]

Hey, it's a commercial world, I just make my own decisions and follow my own path, you gotta give 'em some credit. That said I moved to linux about 4-5 years ago and never looked back! But I know many who just wouldn't want to go down the rabbit hole!

Anyways... I used this and finally got it working... maybe i'll try it on linux, even though i'm an ardent gedit user, one size fits all...

[buzzbee]

Maybe I should of looked before I leaped...

Code

==========================================================================
3. Requirements
==========================================================================

  Windows XP

  Irrlicht SDK, version 1.2 (version 1.0 & 1.1 also work)

Yep vista and irrlicht 1.4... Oh what a day!

[thomas]

It's not Irrlicht's fault, really... as long as there are enough users/developers/hardware manufacturers who will happily buy an operating system that deliberately breaks 75% of all available software for no good reason, things like this happen again and again.
Worse, however, you don't even have much of a choice soon, as it affects other platforms, too.

[JGM]

You might want to use a real operating system or a more recent version of Code::Blocks which contains workarounds for Vista.

hahaha that's funny, you're brave to say that :lol:

[MortenMacFly]

Sorry for being OT, but I use and like Vista. It's at least far better than XP.

[Ceniza]

Sorry for being OT, but I use and like Vista. It's at least far better than XP.

I think it's a matter of taste... just like everything. IMHO, Vista is still in Beta stage. It takes a lot of resources, has a lower performance (it's like every new Windows version is conceived to be a lot slower than the previous one), breaks compatibility with software that worked perfectly up to XP, by trying to get an implementation of "we'll help you keep your system secure" they ended up with "we'll bug you to Hell by asking you 100 times if you're really sure about something", and so on.

The only thing I find interesting about Vista is what game developers will be able to achieve with DirectX 10

Anyway, what really matters right now is that workarounds have been created so MinGW + Code::Blocks can work on Vista out of the box. It's also good to know that there's someone who can test and develop Code::Blocks on Vista, and, more than that, he actually enjoys it (I feel sorry for you, Morten )

[thomas]

It takes a lot of resources, has a lower performance [...] breaks compatibility with software that worked perfectly [...] "we'll help you keep your system secure"

And none of this is necessary or what any sane person would want. Also, it's not "we'll help you keep your system secure", but rather "We'll patronise you, you stupid motherf...er. We'll just do what we think is right, because we know better anyway".

The only thing I find interesting about Vista is what game developers will be able to achieve with DirectX 10

This is one of the most severe implications of Vista. I'd wish that people finally realized how serious this trend is.
Graphic card vendors are only too happy to drop support for OpenGL in favour of DirectX, since they only have one development branch that way. All major manufacturers are months behind schedule to properly implement OpenGL 2.0 (for ATI, it's "years" rather than "months"), and the OpenGL 3.0 specification is long overdue too (because the same firms have their chair in Khronos). On the other hand, game developers concentrate on DirectX because the support from the major PC graphic card vendors is by far better (which again is a reason for these to not concentrate on OpenGL).

The long term implication of this is that OpenGL will not have has no access to techniques that are readily available in hardware, which will alredy does negatively impact all non-Windows-game or cross-platform or academic development.
When Microsoft announced that they intended to drop OpenGL in Vista, a lot of people were upset. But this exactly what is happening now, except it's the graphic card manufacturers who do it, and everybody is all too happy with it.

[byo]

The long term implication of this is that OpenGL will not have has no access to techniques that are readily available in hardware, which will alredy does negatively impact all non-Windows-game or cross-platform or academic development.
When Microsoft announced that they intended to drop OpenGL in Vista, a lot of people were upset. But this exactly what is happening now, except it's the graphic card manufacturers who do it, and everybody is all too happy with it.

Sad but true. It looks like even John Carmack, who always preffered OpenGL, considers using DirectX in new titles. And this is probably because hardware vendors don't have time/resources/willingness to develop good quality OpenGL drivers. Why? DX10 became symbol of new technology (Ms advertised it very well along with Vista) so hardware vendors "must" provide new DX drivers as fast as possible. It doesn't matter than OpenGL could do the same or even more, it doesn't matter that DX is not portable. All because people tend to see new Dx or Vista as a symbol of new technology which is not and will never be true. It's just a very good social trick.

So it's sad but true that Ms will continue their standard strategy by consequently and silently killing another symbol of freedom in computer science - this time in area of graphics and gaming.
But who cares?

BYO