Before I start I want to explain that I am a novice and that it's highly possible that I've missed something simple or that there's something simple that I just don't know about.
Using visual studio I wanted to get a bit of threading practice in but I can't get it to include at the top of my code. I know that is new to C++11 but I'm not sure if that's enabled for Visual Studio 2010 or if it isn't I'm not sure how I would go about doing that.
Here is a screenshot of my code:
You cannot: C++11's Thread support library is not supported by the implementation of the C++ Standard Library shipped with VS2010. You should upgrade to VS2012 if you want to use it.
Alternatively, you could use Boost.Thread, which served as an inspiration for C++11's Standard Thread support library.
As a further option, you could consider purchasing the Just.Thread library, which provides a complete implementation and is available for VS2010 as well.
Related
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'm wondering how well writing software in C++11 works on Windows yet. It would be most comfortable (and propably most natural) to use one of the native compilers for Windows - I'm thinking about Visual Studio 2012 Express or Visual Studio 2013 Express here. Everything I could find so far on that matter is
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/vstudio/hh567368.aspx
(Comparison of C++11 features of VC10 and VC11, which seems to be quite bad)
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/vcblog/archive/2013/06/28/c-11-14-stl-features-fixes-and-breaking-changes-in-vs-2013.aspx (not really transparent, didn't give me a good idea how well it works)
Does anyone have any experience how well the current Visual Studio versions can handle C++11? I really want to start using auto, lambdas, variadic templates, template aliases, initializer lists and rvalue references (to name just a few) and all the other good stuff right now, but if Windows might be a problem I might have to use C++03 further.
Another possibility seems to be to install LLVM and Clang on Windows. My primary platform is OSX, and on that system Clang's support for C++11 is really good. But I read that the LLVM-version of the standard library for C++ (libc++) does not work well on Windows. So LLVM/clang might not be an option.
What are your opinions on C++11 development on Windows?
Thank you!
I can only give you my experience as a developer, as I've been building against the cutting edge of C++ on Windows using Visual C++ for just about everything, while also installing several other compilers and IDEs (including building Clang myself on Windows for Visual Studio 2012, 2012 CTP, and 2013 Preview). The following is my experience up until right now (August 13th, 2013), and is based on Herb Sutter's talk and working with the compiler every day.
The Quick
Run in the opposite direction of Visual Studio / VC++. Support for C++11 is slow, and they're currently being crushed in terms of compiler features versus Clang and GCC.
The Present
Visual C++'s C++11 (and C++14 support) is beyond abysmal right now. They lack powerful features that make template metaprogramming in C++ great (using expressions in particular).
Using doesn't exist right now. I have spent hours and hours porting great C++11 code with using to VC++, only to have it break it certain places, snap, or just become near damn unmaintainable.
Variadic support in the CTP was horrifically terrible, and while it got better for Visual Studio 2013 Preview's version of the compiler, it's still fairly bad at complex variadic and template expressions that obey the standard (and compile fine in GCC and Clang).
=delete and =default are pretty much gone from VC++ right now; in the hopeful near future, maybe it will work out (and it should come "soon-ish", according to the roadmap) (I had to implement r-value constructors explicitly for many simple classes all the way down a 8-class inheritance hierarchy once. It was the worst slap in the face, when I watched GCC and Clang users get all of my explicit hardcoded work for free with =default).
As a holdover (primarily because of Windows OS code and some binary compatabilities), Empty-Base-Class-Optomizations in VC++ don't work. Don't expect your class hierarchy sizes or member layout to be optimized in the least (watch your ordering in std::tuple when packing variable types).
This is about all the frustrations I've come into contact with so far. They're work-aroundable -- I have to work with them every day -- but if you want great C++ support, you should jump for GCC or Clang and somehow make it work on your machine.
The Future
If you really want C++11, you will need to wait about a year, and even then Visual Studio 2013's release of VC++ will still be missing a few features (and don't expect them to be bugless either). VC++ for 2013 will also still be critically missing std::move and explicit r-value support in many places, making it painful when you expect things to work.
The Caveat
If you're not a powerful Vim user, you're low on options when it comes to IDEs that you can work with (that play nice with GDB/GCC or Clang).
QtCreator is nice, works with MinGW, and is generally fully featured enough to get work done.
Sublime Text can be used, but you'll have to write your own building system or delegate that to something else.
Code::Blocks's autocomplete is wonky and behaves strangely, and the IDE itself feels clunky.
Eclipse is supposed to be good, but my experiences with it are clunky and strange, with odd input lags at time (despite a 8.00 GB i7 Haswell machine using an SSD).
Visual Studio, as an IDE, is pretty solid. Then stack Visual Assist X on top, and it works pretty damn well for C++ coding. It's really the only reason I continue to stick with it, but I've already made headway into learning Vim so I can mostly ditch Visual Studio altogether, when the time comes.
About Libraries
Library support in VC++ is pretty complete (for as much as their broken compiler lets them be complete). It has regex, while most other libraries have non-existent or broken regex support. But that doesn't mean that the VC++ library plays nice with some C++11 features that it says it does (picture by melak47).
And Lastly
If you want code that you know is going to work in Windows, 100%, for the rest of eternity, you'll probably want to program against VC++. The other "benefit" is that the code you write in VC++ is the smallest subset of C++/C++11 you can write with, so in the end it should compile everywhere. Of course, that goes against the very idea of using beautiful C++11 and enjoying it, so... pick your poison(s) wisely.
VC's C++11 support is far from complete, but it does include the most important user-facing features.
And here's the other thing. In my experience, it is fine to install MinGW or Clang on Windows, but you're going to have some inconvenience because hardly anybody precompiles binaries for those compilers for Windows (whereas lots of people precompile binaries for Visual Studio).
In addition, there are as far as I am aware no environments for Windows which are remotely as advanced as Visual Studio for things like graphical debugging, intellisense, and stuff like that. When I tried Code::Blocks it just didn't work, realistically.
You can see here for a comprehensive comparison of compiler support for C++11 language features. Here's some info on VS's C++11/14 roadmap.
MSVC is lagging behind the other major C++ compilers but it's still got support for many of the most important features.
auto, lambdas, and rvalue references are available from VS10. IIRC there's a caveat with rvalue references that the compiler doesn't generate move construction and move assignment operators.
variadic templates and initializer lists are available in the VS2013 preview, including library support.
type aliasing (i.e., typedefs with the using keyword) is expected to be available in VS 2013 RTM.
If you don't need to interoperate with binaries generated by VS then installing another compiler such as GCC is workable. I understand Clang can also work in a mingw environment, with libstdc++ rather than libc++.
http://nuwen.net/mingw.html
The nuwen distro is AWESOME! It is MinGW but it comes out much quicker than MinGW as new GCC releases come out. It also comes with all of boost and other useful libraries already compiled. It is all I use on windows anymore.
We are using C++11 for a few months already in production software across windows and linux in some here.com products without any problems. We use auto, lambdas, range for... Using Visual studio 2012 and gcc 4.7.
I have been using VS2012 and used C++11 features where possible. There are some bugs in the implementations and I have found it helpful to have another compiler to hand when I get errors from Visual Studio to compare against.
Clang and GCC to lead the way in terms of C++11 feature support and it appears to be a neck-and-neck race in terms of C++11 support between the two. MSVC is sadly panting trying to keep up and lagging behind. The Nuwen MingGW distro is, as Jake mentions, excellent and appears to be working well with Eclipse (Kepler release) and I didn't encounter too much pain using it with Netbeans 7.4 either. The Nuwen distro is currently at version 11.2 at the time of writing and, as you can see at Stephan's website, is now x64-native, featuring GCC 4.8.1 and Boost 1.54.0, with GCC's default mode also set to C++11.
I'm certainly beginning to use Eclipse Kepler and Nuwen MinGW in preference to MSVC 2012 more and more, but I'm largely a hobbyist C++ programmer still getting my feet wet and may not have hit the more obscure problems that those to whom C++ is their bread and butter may know about.
I have been using C++ Builder to develop some classes. I have been using the TDateTime data type by including the 'vcl.h'. Is this only unique to C++ Builder?
I ask this because I am now using Microsoft Visual Studio C++ and am getting a 'TDateTime is undefined error'.
How can I use this type in Visual Studio?
Thanks
I would suggest having a look at boost.datetime and, if you have access to C++11 support, the standard C++ time and time duration utilities available in the <chrono> header. One advantage of using either of these is that they are portable, so you are not bound to a given compiler or development environment.
Most of Borland's Visual Component Library is built around it's own compiler-specific extensions and delphi code. I very much doubt you will have an easy time getting it to work under any other compiler.
LUckily there are plenty of alternatives. If you're using Visual C++, then you can use Microsoft's Date/Time libraries:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/6ahxxcsz%28v=vs.100%29.aspx
There are also portable libraries from Boost and QT which should run under any modern C++ compiler
http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_51_0/doc/html/date_time.html
http://doc.qt.digia.com/4.5/qdatetime.html
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'm under the impression certain compilers only work for making windows applications.
If you want to develop GUI applications and/or go for maximum portability, go for MinGW for compiler, and Qt Creator for IDE (it comes with MinGW bundled).
If you want to stick to Windows, and don't mind coding UI directly using Win32 API, then Visual C++ Express would do the trick.
If you care about portability to Unix, use the mingw compilers which are based on gcc. Gcc is widely available on a lot of architectures and OS. If you only work for Windows, Visual Studio Express might be a better choice in comparison to Codeblocks.
How about Visual Studio Express? This is a complete package with a very nice IDE.
Codeblocks supports many compilers. I recommend using CB with mingw for general purpose usage.
Depends what you want to do. If you want to use POSIX APIs you may want to use mingw. If you distribute to Windows folks, you probably want to use Visual Studio since its compiler is usually better at producing optimized code.
CMake might be something you want to use if you want multiple platforms - it'll create your CodeBlocks/Eclipse/Visual Studio/GNU Make projects for you w/ all the correct settings.
If you are keen on using Codeblocks mingw is a good choice. But C++ is not like Java. It is not write once run everywhere. Also it is not write once compile on different platforms and run everywhere.
You have to change your code for different platforms (win/unix etc...) (eg: socket programming differs on Windows and Linux)
This means that you are not platform independent. So I recommend you to go for a better one. Eclipse is good, community is great but for me QT or Visual Studio (6.0 or 2008 for .Net) would be better.