I recently installed Turbo C++ from the official page, and installed it.
But after running it, I found that it was missing many header files (like iostream, iomanip, graphics, conio, etc..). The only header files available were stdio.h and math.h. I want the other header files, because I am trying for creating a project of structure of an atom using graphics, and I need other headers too for I/O operations.
From where can I get these header files? Please help.
Turbo C++ is a compiler/IDE for Borland C++, a dialect of pre-standard C++.
After ISO C++98 ... well, a lot of stuff happened over the intervening two decades.
What you want is one of the modern compilers compliant with at least ISO C++98, but preferably ISO C++11 or ISO C++14.
In a short, not fully inclusive list:
Microsoft Visual Compiler (MSVC), Intel C++ Compiler (ICC), Gnu Compiler Collection (GCC), and LLVM Clang ones I can think of off the top of my head.
There's a number of IDEs, but Eclipse, Code::Blocks, and Visual Studio Code are reasonably popular, and, probably importantly, free.
Related
I was thinking STL was a standard implementation, though TR1 may not be. But does the platform matter? I was thinking it would work on Windows/Linux/Unix/Mac. I have people saying it wont work on anything other than Windows.
Please let me know.
-TIA
No, the STL ( not to be confused with the C++ standard library ) was developed by Alexander Stepanov when working for HP and Silicon Graphics. Much of the STL later was included into the C++ standard library, hence sometimes the STL and the templated containers in the C++ standard library are confused.
The second STL implementation (SGI) was designed to work with any standard complient C++ compiler, though IIRC not the early Microsoft 'C++' compilers due to lack of required features. (I seem to recall trying to play with it in the late 90s). The C++ standard library now requires some compiler intrinsics so there is no 'standard implementation' possible. (IIRC these are for atomic operations, but edit or comment if you know better)
So the implementation of the C++ standard library which ships with Visual Studio will only work with 'Windows'*, and probably only with Microsoft's C++ compiler. Other implementations will work with other compilers and on other platforms.
*Visual studio C++ can cross compile to other variants of Windows, so a version of the standard library for Windows 10 x64 will not work on Windows 7 ARM embedded.
Say I have a open source C::B C++ (non-C++11, perfectly compatible with the 1998 ISO standard) project I've downloaded which is using MinGW/GCC (TDM-1 4.7.1 or 4.7.2 - doesn't work with newest version),; can I port the source files from it to Visual Studio 2010 and be able to make it work without massive code rewriting? Or there are certain cases in which it won't be possible? Or it depends on various things?
EDIT:
The code relies on additional external utilities and libraries such as:
Lua
SDL 2.0 + SDL Image 2.0
OpenGL
The most General and correct response is: It depends on various things.
What kind of project are you refering to? Is it wxWidget, QT4, GTK+, OpenGL?
How much do you use c++11?
Assuming that we are talking about a simple Console Application the easiest way to verify whether you can migrate to MSVC2010 is to switch compiler inside Code::Blocks project.
Select Project->Build Option... and under Selected compiler choose Microsoft Visual Studio C++ 2010. Afterwards try to recompile. The warning and errors will show you how easy will be the porting.
Of course you have to install Code::Blocks with MSVC2010 too.
EDIT: The OpenGL library is supported by MSVC2010 and libsdl has VC development libraries. However, things seem to be more complex with Lua. My guess is that you might start a substantial porting work here.
If the project was written using portable C++98 code you shouldn't have too much trouble. First, I would check you can compile in GCC with -std=c++98 -pedantic flags and fix any warnings to ensure you are not relying on any GCC extensions.
It also depends on the portability of any required libraries.
Try it!
If your code is standard-compliant and does not rely on any GCC extensions or GCC-specific libraries, then you should be fine out-of-the-box.
Note though that different compilers support C++ in different ways; for example, even Visual Studio 2013 has only passing C++11 support so if your program is a C++11 program with things like ranged-for and initializer lists in it then, depending on the version you're using, it's just not going to work without those pieces of code being rewritten to look more like C++03.
I actually made a mistake:
C::B indeed told me there were multiple errors in the compilation attempt with the MSVC2010 compiler, because the code included many Unix-only libraries, too intricately so to be easily avoided. Thus, I'm thinking of either making MinGW/GCC work in Visual Studio itself or sticking with C::B.
(Continues here: POSIX Headers (from MinGW project) in Visual Studio 2013)
I like the Visual Studio IDE. I'm used to it and find it is the best IDE I've ever tried. We also find increasing use of C#/.NET here.
However, after the underwhelming announcement regarding C++11 features in VS11 I'm looking into replacing the compiler.
It seems that the Intel compiler fully integrates with VS but that doesn't mean it will compile our Windows code. I don't know how I'd fare with a try of g++ or clang
Can VS actually be productively used with a different C++ compiler to compile Windows code, that is legacy code using all kinds of Win32 / MFC / COM stuff?
Depends on how much use you made of the Microsoft-proprietary extensions. Things like #pragma once tend to be supported by all the major compilers, but the weirder COM things (e.g., #import and anything C++/CLI) probably won't be. No idea if MFC will build under the new compiler, but you'll probably have to link it statically or ship your own DLL; G++ definitely uses a different mangling scheme than MSVC.
I'm not sure how easy it is to replace cl.exe and keep your vcproj files intact (though some compilers actually do it), but there are always Makefile projects.
I have never actually worked with the Intel C++ compiler, but I see no reason why it wouldn't compile the code that VC++ does. Here is official Intel documentation.
I use Visual Studio 2008 with a Makefile project to cross-compile; no reason you couldn't do the same with a different Windows compiler.
Can C++builder compile any c++ source files.
I don't have a good knowledge in c++. but i have some experience in delphi.
I like to use c++ but confused which one to use
I know that cbuilder has vcl , easy to develop ,easy for delphi developer
But my problem is can it compile any c++ files (vc++ and other source files).
is it compatible with vc++ (excluding MFC and VCL). Can i use any APIs with c++builder
You'll find C++ Builder very comfy coming from Delphi if you don't care about MFC or .NET via C++/CLI etc and just want native C++ then either will work for you. Visual Studio 2010 supports a lot of the new C++0x features which is pretty nice, although they don't have variadic templates yet. I'm not sure how much of C++0x is in C++ Builder as yet but that could be worth looking into as a deciding factor.
It should be able to compile any standards conforming code. If the code uses extensions that another compiler provides, it will more than likely have problems. VC++ has quite a few extensions that are on by default and so someone using that compiler might use them with out realizing what is going on(the same applies to G++ the other major C++ compiler out there.)
In my experience, C++Builder's support for more advanced C++ code is limited. For example, many of Boost's libraries are unsupported in C++Builder, and I've often had to modify other open source libraries to get them to build properly in C++Builder (due to various bugs or limitations in C++Builder's compiler). Simpler C++ code can work without any problems.
So, depending on what C++ libraries / source files / APIs you're wanting to use, getting them to work in C++Builder may be very straightforward, or it may take significant work.
You can download a free version of C++ Builder at www.embarcadero.com. With that, you can test your libraries for compatibility.
I find C++ is very controversial language in microsoft world. By default we have ISO C++ and then microsoft has Managed C++ and now C++ CLI.
I just know standard (ISO) C++. I don't know microsoft's version of C++.
I'm confused about interpretation of any c++ code by visual studio 2008 (or later). Thats why I'm using gnu tools for compiling my programs. But I do love Visual Studio.
What settings do I need to make if I only want to use
STRICTLY ISO C++
Managed C++ (its deprecated but I think they still support it for sake of backward compatibility)
C++ CLI (for .NET platform)
I want to build native assemblies using C++ not managed ones. So, is there anything else should I need to do?
Everything is in the build settings:
Common Language Runtime Support (/clr) - add or remove CLR support
Advance Compile as C++ Code (/TP) - to choose if c++ or c..
Language: Disable Language Extention - use this to force ANSI.
When you ask Visual Studio to make a C++ project, it makes a C++ project. C++/CLI is a different language.
VS2008 and earlier have implemented C++03 (or approximated it. Like almost every other compiler, there are bits of the standard that are not followed to the letter. A few features are not implemented (exception specifications, the export keyword or two-phase name lookup are the ones I can think of), and some proprietary extensions are added as well.
GCC, and most big compilers, do the exact same thing, so this isn't a case of Microsoft being "evil" as such. The extensions can be disabled, leaving you with a reasonably standards-compliant compiler.
VC2010 is adding a number of C++0x features (and at least in the beta, I haven't been able to find an option to disable these), so from a strict C++03 compliance point of view, it is going to be less compliant.
Dani's answer already tells you which settings to change to enable/disable different language dialects.