I am trying to figure out which C/C++ compiler to use. I found this list of C/C++ compilers at Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_compilers#C.2FC.2B.2B_compilers
I am fairly certain that I want to go with an open source compiler. I feel that if it is open source then it will be a more complete compiler since many programmer perspectives are used to make it better. Please tell me if you disagree.
I should mention that I plan on learning C/C++ mainly to program 2D/3D game applications that will be compatible with Windows, Linux, MAC and iPhone operating systems. I am currently using Windows Vista x64 OS.
First of all, IMHO as a beginner your development environment (IDE) matters a lot more than the compiler.
I think that people place too much emphasis on compiler choice early on. While it is not Java, C++ is meant to be portable.
If the program you're writing only works with specific compilers, you're probably doing the wrong thing or can work a little on making it more portable.
If you get to a point where compiler choice makes a significant performance impact for you, then you've already perfected everything else in your program and you're in a good state and you are also quite advanced in your abilities. We used to teach the differences between compilers at fairly advanced stages in the CS curriculum.
If you use a UNIX based machine (Linux, Mac, actual Linux), then pretty much GNU (g++) is the way to go and is fairly much standard. If it's good enough to compile your OS, it's probably good enough for you. On a mac you can use XCode as your IDE, and it interfaces well with g++. On Linux some people prefer command line tools, though you might like the Eclipse C++ support, it is much better today than it was 3-4 years ago.
Things on Windows are trickier. If you can afford it, have access to, or are eligible for one of the free editions (e.g., via a school), I think the Microsoft Visual C++ Environments (or whatever they are called now) are pretty good for learning and they are used in production. I think there's actually a lightweight visual studio now with an emphasis on C++ that could be a good start. If you don't, you can probably find a distribution of Eclipse that is specific for C++ and includes an implementation of the GNU compilers.
Use gcc and g++ while you're still learning these languages, a big enough task for now. If you need a specialized compiler down the road, you'll want to have much deeper understanding of the language and your problem domain to properly evaluate candidates.
I feel that if it is open source then it will be a more complete compiler since many programmer perspectives are used to make it better.
That's not necessarily true. You could also say that if you use Microsoft's compiler, it will be optimal for Windows, since Microsoft knows best how to optimize a compiler for Windows.
Microsoft has Visual C++ Express Edition which is free and ofcourse includes a nice IDE that's very well suited for Windows development.
But if you're interested in making portable software, look at GCC, which is the default compiler on Linux and which is also available on the Mac. (The iPhone works totally different and requires special tools that only run on Mac OS X). You can get GCC for Windows with Cygwin or MinGW.
Get the Visual Studio Express (easier and quicker IMO, to setup) and learn with it; when you think you know enough about C++ and how "things" work, you could start using something like QT or GCC (with cygwin) and learn to port to different platforms.
For windows u can use CodeBlocks I believe it uses gcc and its pretty user friendly
I strongly suggest going with MinGW.
It is:
Open-source
Available on all major platforms
Comes with standard Win32 headers and libraries
The key to writing portable C++ code is:
Use a cross-platform version control system (subversion is a great choice), because this makes it easier to
Compile and test your code on other platforms early and often
Related
First of, I am very new to programming, but took an interest in it. I have successfully built a C++ Console program for Windows which is a simple Database program, which can edit / delete / input entries.
I am less and less relying on Windows for day to day stuff. I had an old HP Netbook which was impossible to use with Windows, but I put in a Linux Distro and works like a charm.
As I sometimes do use Windows, as well as having built the program to use in Windows, I am wondering if the same code can be used to compile a Linux program? I could use WINE to run it but would prefer running something specific to Linux. Is this possible with the same code or would I have to make another Linux version of it?
I would assume that since you are new to programming, that you did not make the extraordinary effort to make your code portable across platforms. That takes a significant skill set, especially if you are accessing external resources such as a database. So the answer is you will probably have to re-write for Linux, and specifically the database interface.
I guess that you want your C++ code to be compilable both on Linux and on Windows. You'll need operating-system specific compilers for that (a different one on Linux and on Windows).
I am wondering if the same code can be used to compile a Linux program?
The program to compile your C++ code is called a compiler. On Linux you will use GCC as the g++ command (which you could even customize with MELT, but that is not for newbies), or Clang/LLVM as the clang++ command. You'll use a builder like make (see here for why, and this example). Be sure to install a recent version (GCC 4.9 or Clang 3.5 at least in start of 2015) to get good C++11 support. Focus on learning C++11 (or C++14) not some earlier variant (so use a C++11 compiler).
I don't know Windows so I cannot recommend any good C++ compiler for it (but I heard of MinGW, CygWin and of Microsoft Visual C++; look also into recent Clang...).
You might be interested in cross-platform C++ framework libraries like Qt or POCO (and perhaps also Sqlite for database related stuff). They will help you to code some C++ usable on both systems (after recompilation).
BTW, you can always encapsulate your system specific code with preprocessor directives à la #if LINUX ;take care of putting all the OS specific (or OS related) code in a few source files.
It could happen (and I wish that for you) that you get fond & happy of Linux and will, in a few months, prefer to code for Linux only (you'll then install Linux on all your machines). BTW, study the source code of existing free software you like and use on Linux. That will teach you a lot.
The advices I gave here and here are still relevant today when coding on Linux. Read also something about porting & portability, and Advanced Linux Programming.
Firstly, please forgive my ignorance regarding these matters, I have done a search and not found any comprehensive answers as of yet.
I plan on learning how to develop for Windows, however I am very fond of the GNU toolchain and don't really want to move onto using big environments like Visual Studio until I feel more comfortable with the underlying basics.
From what I understand, one can download the Windows SDK, which contains the headers and libraries needed to build native Windows applications.
Is the SDK literally just a collection of libraries and headers? If so, as my logic goes, it should be possible to point MinGW towards these libraries/headers, and simply build as normal.
When I build using Visual Studio, I can't see what preprocessor directives are being defined, what is being linked in etc. etc., as I am still learning, I like to be able to know exactly what is going on, preferably so I have to manually define, link etc. Hence the question.
So, what I want to know: is my logic correct?
Again, apologies if the question is rudimentary, I am still learning.
P.s. I am planning to develop Windows applications in a windows environment, this is not a question regarding cross-compilation.
Thanks!
MinGW is not compatible with the official Windows SDK, with one of the reasons
being that the SDK contains many VS-specific things (opposed to the GCC base
on MinGW). MinGW has adapted many of the necessary files, and for many programs
this is enough.
You don´t need to know the VS project settings for some program;
MinGW is still GCC in the core and used as such. If you can compile
programs with GCC on linux, learning how to use MinGW won´t be hard.
If you need functions/structures/etc. which are not yet part of it,
you´re out of luck, other than doing the adaption yourself, which
can be everything between very easy or very hard, depending on the case.
Additionally, proper thread usage is a bit quirky (has some "hidden" pitfalls,
which could go unnoticed in an actual program for years, but then...).
(While this is a disadvantage to VS, you´ll get C++11/14 (while VS hasn´t
even finished with 11, see link), better optimzation in many cases etc.)
If you´re choosing what exactly to download, look at WinGW-W64 instead of
the "original" old one. The original project somewhat stopped, has poor
lib support compared to W64, no 64bit compiler etc. (and don´t misunderstand
the "W64", it can be used for 32bit programs too)
I currently develop in C++ on Windows, using Visual Studio 2010. After the official announcement of C++11, I have begun to use some of its features that are already available in MSVC. But, as expected, the great majority of the new changes are not supported.
I thought maybe the upcoming version of Visual Studio would add these new features. However, after reading this it looks like very little is going to change.
And so, I'm curious about the feasibility of using GCC on Windows rather than MSVC, as it appears to support the great majority of C++11 already. As far as I can tell, this would mean using MinGW (I haven't seen any other native Windows versions of GCC). But I have questions about whether this would be worth trying:
Can it be used as a drop-in replacement for cl.exe, or would it involve a lot of hacks and compatibility issues to get Visual Studio to use a different compiler?
The main selling point for Visual Studio, in my opinion, is it's debugger. Is that still usable if you use a different compiler?
Since GCC comes from the *nix world, and isn't native to Windows, are there code quality issues with creating native Windows applications, versus using the native MSVC compiler? (If it matters: most of my projects are games.)
In other words, will the quality of my compiled exe's suffer from using a non-Windows-native compiler?
MSVC has the huge advantage of coming with an IDE that has no equals under Windows, including debugger support.
The probably best alternative for MinGW would be Code::Blocks, but there are worlds in between, especially regarding code completion and the debugger.
Also, MSVC lets you use some proprietary Microsoft stuff (MFC, ATL, and possibly others) that MinGW has no support for, and makes using GDI+ and DirectX easier and more straightforward (though it is possible to do both with MinGW).
Cygwin, as mentioned in another post, will have extra dependencies and possible license issues (the dependency is GPL, so your programs must be, too). MinGW does not have any such dependency or issue.
MinGW also compiles significantly slower than MSVC (though precompiled headers help a little).
Despite all that, GCC/MinGW is an entirely reliable quality compiler, which in my opinion outperforms any to date available version of MSVC in terms of quality of generated code.
This is somewhat less pronounced with the most recent versions of MSVC, but still visible. Especially for anything related to SSE, intrinsics, and inline assembly, GCC has been totally anihilating MSVC ever since (though they're slowly catching up).
Standards compliance is a lot better in GCC too, which can be a double-edged sword (because it can mean that some of your code won't compile on the more conforming compiler!), as is C++11 support.
MinGW optionally also supports DW2 exceptions, which are totally incompatible with the "normal" flavour and take more space in the executable, but on the positive side are "practically zero cost" in runtime.
I want to add some information because the field may have changed since the question was asked.
The main problem for switching away from MSVC was the lack of a good IDE that flawlessly integrates with MinGW . Visual Studio is a very powerful tool and was the only player on Windows for quite some time. However, Jetbrains released a preview version of their new C++ IDE CLion some days ago.
The main benefit comes when working on cross platform applications. In this case, a GCC based tool chain can make life much easier. Moreover, CLion narrowly integrates with CMake, which is also a big plus compared to Visual Studio. Therefore, in my opinion, it is worth to consider switching to MinGW now.
GCC's C++11 support is quite phenomenal (and quite up to par with standards conformance, now that <regex> has been implemented).
If you replace your compiler, you'll need to make sure every dependency can be built with that new compiler. They're not made to be substitutable plugins (although Clang is working on becoming that way).
GCC is a fine compiler, and can produce code that has pretty much the same performance, if not better, than MSVC. It is missing some low-level Windows-specific features though.
Apart from this, to answer your questions:
To get VS to use GCC as a compiler, you'd pretty much need to turn to makefiles or custom build steps all the way. You'd be much better off compiling from the commandline and using CMake or something similar.
You cannot use the VS debugger for GCC code. GCC outputs GDB compatible debug information, and the VS debug format is proprietary, so nothing will change in that area anytime soon.
Code quality is just as good as you'd want it. See above.
No, the quality of your code will actually increase, as GCC will point out several assumed standard extensions MSVC would hide from you. All self-respecting open source projects can be compiled with GCC.
I my humble opinion, it's depends how someone started to code in the first place. I've been using g++ and gcc for more than 20 years now but the reason why i keep using gcc is mainly for licensing reasons. Although i like it too when i don't have a bunch of runtime dependencies or dll's to bundle with my stuff since i came from the DOS era, i still like my stuff small and fast. gcc for windows comes with standard win32 libraries and common control but i had to develop my own win32 controls for stuff that might require mcf shit to work properly or just to look nicer.
Although gcc might have strong support over internet, when it comes to win32 stuff, many rely on mcf and vc proprietary stuff so again, one may have to work his own issues around and be creative when difficulty arises.
I think it's all about needs and circumstances. If you are just a hobbyist coders and have the time for researches, creating you own libs and stuff but you want a solid compiler that's around since the late 80's and free, gcc sound perfect for the job.
But in the industry visual studio is a must if you want to be competitive and stay in the race. Many hardware manufacturers would prefer bundling visual studio compatible libraries for they hardware over some opensource gnu stuff.
That's my two cents.
To be honest, C++ should be handled with MS Visual Studio. If you want to make cross-platform or Unix apps, use GCC. GCC works and can be used with any IDE other than Visual Studio. Even Visual Studio Code can use GCC. Code::Blocks, Eclipse IDE for C/C++ developers, CLion, Notepad++ and even the good ol' tool we've always known, Notepad works with GCC. And finally, on a PC with low disk space, installing Visual Studio's "Desktop Development with C++" is something like 5 GB, if it was to be useful. And this is where GCC hits MSVC hard. It has native C support. MSVC can compile C, but only with a lot of fine-tuning. It takes a lot of time and effort to finally be able to compile. The final verdict:
If MSVC works, it hella works! If MSVC doesn't work, it HELLA DON'T WORK.
If GCC installs, it works, and if it doesn't work, it's the IDE's problem.
GCC is for people who don't mind spending 4 hours at the computer making it work properly. MSVC is for those who don't care about C and want it to install without any pokin' around.
It can't be used as a direct swap-out replacement for the microsoft compilers, for a start it has a vastly different set of command line arguments and compiler specific options.
You can make use of MinGW or Cygwin to write software but introduce extra dependencies ( especially in the case of cygwin ).
One not often touted advantage of gcc over cl is that gcc can be used with ccache to drastically speed up rebuilds or distcc to build using several other machines as compiler slaves.
Consider the Intel compiler (or "Composer" as they seem to have taken to calling it) as another option. I'm not too sure where its C++11 support is at compared with MS (certainly it has lambdas), but it does integrate very nicely with VisualStudio (e.g different projects within a solution can use the Intel or MS compilers) and there's also been some efforts made to match the MS compiler commandline options.
GCC and MSVC use different name mangling conventions for C++. C++ dlls compiled by one compiler can not be used in applications compiled with the other. I believe this is the main reason we don't see more widespread use of gcc in windows.
I've been spending my "inbetween" time at the office looking into C++. I'm primarily a flash & web developer, also working on a bunch of flash games, but I thought it was time to have a look at some non-web-based languages and see if I could get some real games going.
I've got the hang of how typing works, arrays, outputting using cout, structs, classes and so on and so on.
I seem to have found myself stuck in terms of what I can do next. Outputting to a DOS window obviously isn't that exciting - how do I get started on doing something graphical? A square moving around on the screen, even. Simple is better in this case.
As for the compiler - I've been using devcpp by Bloodshed; is this adequate or am I missing a more common compiler somehow?
Graphics can be done using DirectX in Windows, or OpenGL on every platform. It's a whole different discussion upon which to choose.
In addition to trying to work with graphics, you could try your hand at developing GUIs. I'd give Qt a shot. Be warned though, Qt is being sold by Nokia, but it's overall a very well known and heavily used framework. Or try direct Win32 (not necessarily something I'd suggest unless you're interested). Or try WinForms (requires .NET experience, and steals from the true C++; C++/CLR is NOT the same C++ you are learning--it adds to it). If you do go the .NET route, avoid "Managed C++" examples, as they that was the first iteration of C++/CLR, and they simply redid it and vastly improved it.
Two most common compilers: gcc (Linux, Mac and Windows) and Visual Studio's for development on Windows', I always use Visual Studio (there is a free version called Visual Studio Express that is a solid product) for Windows development simply because I love the IDE.
For a compiler, my school uses g++, an excellent, free C++ compiler that is compatible with many IDEs for unix-based C++ development. If you're running a windows machine, you'll have to download cygwin (which emulates a linux shell) - you'll have to select which executables you want to download with the cygwin shell, figuring out what items you need may take a little time (basically, download useful looking things for the type of development that you want to do; g++/gcc are very important).
http://cygwin.com/install.html
When you have this, you can easily configure netbeans or eclipse (I've had better experience with netbeans) to compile and run your C++ code through cygwin.
Also, my favorite resource for learning C++ has been cplusplus.com - it has detailed tutorials of all of C/C++'s standard functions.
Hope this helps a little!
Have a look at graphics and windowing libraries. For windowing, as you seem to be on Windows, there's builtin stuff. For more general applicability I suggest having a look at Qt or Gtk.
For graphics, the fancy stuff is usually done in either DirectX (basically Windows only) or OpenGL (more portable).
Compilers: GCC is commonly used in the Unix/Linux world and also available on Windows through Cygwin. In the Windows world you'll also find Microsoft's MSVCC as it comes with their development tools. Btw., there are free dev tools from Microsoft as well, see their Visual Studio Express Editions.
Some tips:
Work through one or more good books. I recommend "Accelerated C++" and "Effective C++". These books will teach you real C++ programming.
If you're on Windows then I think you're better off using Visual Studio. The learning curve for C++ is steep enough already. If you simultaneously need to learn how to work with gcc and makefiles then you are likely to become overwhelmed.
Windows specific: for simple graphics I find WinAPI and GDI+ useful. They are relatively easy to learn and they are immediately available.
Currently I`m using Visual Studio for writing code in C++. But it seems so weighty that I decided to switch for another one, preferably free, not so strict to system resources (I mean memory, of course) as VS to learn libraries, such as Boost and Qt. What compiler do you suggest?
I'd suggest using Visual Studio's compiler from the command-line. You get the same high-quality compiler, without the resource-hogging IDE.
Although the IDE is pretty good too, and probably worth the resources it uses.
Code::blocks is exactly what you are after. You can can download it here: http://www.codeblocks.org/downloads/5
Choose the version with the mingw compiler bundled with it (Windows port of GCC). You can switch between that and the VC++ compiler as and when you like.
Code::Blocks has all the stuff you want, debugger integration, code completion, class browser, todo list etc. etc. It even import visual C++ projects.
Don't use Dev C++ which has already been recommended. It's very very old and outdated.
If you want to learn unix tools download and install cygwin It's a good set of tools but a full install takes up 5 or 6 gigs because so much is included.
There is always Digital Mars. Also, you can freely download Microsoft WDK
which comes with their C/C++ compiler and command-line build system.
You will be hard-pressed to find an IDE as capable as MS VS. It is incredibly feature-rich.
However, if you just want command line compiling and linking it can do that too.
GCC is also an option.
Please note that you do not need another compiler or IDE to use boost libraries. I wouldn't replace Visual Studio with any other IDE/compiler, at least not on Windows. Installing Cygwin or SUA (better than Cygwin, closer to the Windows Kernel) will only be a pain just for what you are trying to reach.
Try to minimize the memory usage by disabling unnecessary things, keep the amount of open source files small, use an alternative to document explorer to find help (your browser on msdn will do). Besides that, I wouldn't call a few ten megabytes of memory a high usage. As long as it doesn't slow your system down there is not a real issue.
A better idea would be to upgrade your computer rather than to replace something powerful with something that you don't know.
Seriously there is no real alternative to Ms's compiler on Windows. All the others are OK if you can't spring for Visual Studio or if you are just doing hobbyist work. Cygwin can be a pain to deal with.
If you don't want the IDE as someone else suggested just use the command-line compiler.
I've found VS to be quite good for doing Boost + Qt work. Especially if you have the Qt + VS integration tool. You get a GUI designer and respectable Qt project management tools.
If you are looking for a compiler that uses fewer system resources than the MS ones, you'll probably find that most modern compilers that are able to compile a good part of or almost everything in Boost will be quite heavy on system resources, both processor usage and memory consumption. To a certain extent that's just par for the course when it comes to C++.
That said, I do like to have a second compiler around if I'm writing portable code as it's a lot easier to iron out portability issues when you can ensure that the code compiles in different environments. If you want to do all that on Windows, may Cygwin is worth a look. However it does seem that the GCC you get with Cygwin is not exactly what you'd call up to date.
The aforementioned Digital Mars compilers are well worth a look, Walter Bright (the guy behind them) has been writing C++ compilers for a long time and they're pretty good. I have used them off and on since the early nineties and I've always been happy with them. Not to mention that they always seemed noticeably faster than the Microsoft offerings, but I haven't got any recent measurements to back that up.
At the end of the day, most third-party tool vendors on Windows tend to target the MS environment so if you're writing C++ code professionally and need/want tools like leak detectors, you pretty much need to be able to build with the MS compilers, even if they aren't your main development environment.
I sugget , Netbeans.org
NetBeans IDE , download the Cygwin , follow one tutorial from http://www.netbeans.org for C++ confuguration at Netbeans IDE , just 2 steps.. and u are ok
autocomplete (faster than VS')
classes
and all... you want xD
It needs to mention about DevCpp. It is a simple UI wrap for gcc compiler (oh my, it is sounds like a tautology). It provides lightweight IDE but not so stable (so, its IntelliSense is somewhat buggy).
If you use Qt why not use their IDE, QtCreator, there is compiler, debugger and GUI designer. All comes in one nice package and works on Windows, Mac and Linux.
In my opinion it's better than Code::Blocks (also based on MinGW/GCC).