Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > C Programming > Re: C99 compiler

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: C99 compiler

 
 
Richard Heathfield
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-25-2003
Anders Johansson wrote:

> Hi all experts,
> I'd like to know if there exist a free C compiler which completely
> fulfills the C99 standard. I would really appreciate if someone could
> point me to one.


Possibly.

gcc is reasonably close to C99 conformance, and is free.

Comeau offer a conforming C99 compiler (no library), but it's not free.
Dinkumware offer a conforming C99 library (no compiler), but it's not free.
The two work together, fortunately.

I have heard rumours that Intel offer a conforming C99 compiler (not free),
and that there is at least one non-gcc free compiler that claims to
conform, but I have no idea how true these rumours are.

--
Richard Heathfield : http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)
"Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
K&R answers, C books, etc: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Russell Hanneken
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-25-2003
jacob navia wrote:
>
> lcc-win32 is approaching [C99] conformance, and many things work already.


Jacob,

Would you say it's closer than GCC?

http://gcc.gnu.org/c99status.html

Regards,

Russell Hanneken
(E-Mail Removed)

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Richard Heathfield
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-25-2003
jacob navia wrote:

>
> "Richard Heathfield" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:bidhgs$7lu$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>
>> I have heard rumours that Intel offer a conforming C99 compiler (not
>> free), and that there is at least one non-gcc free compiler that claims
>> to conform, but I have no idea how true these rumours are.

>
> lcc-win32 is approaching conformance, and many things work already. Maybe
> it was that compiler the "non-gcc free compiler" you were talking about
> Richard?


Yes, I think so.

--
Richard Heathfield : (E-Mail Removed)
"Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
K&R answers, C books, etc: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton
 
Reply With Quote
 
moses
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-26-2003

"Greg Comeau" <(E-Mail Removed)> skrev i meddelandet
news:bigbsj$7sf$(E-Mail Removed)...
> In article <bidhgs$7lu$(E-Mail Removed)>,
> Richard Heathfield <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >Anders Johansson wrote:
> >> I'd like to know if there exist a free C compiler which completely
> >> fulfills the C99 standard. I would really appreciate if someone could
> >> point me to one.

> >
> >Possibly.
> >
> >gcc is reasonably close to C99 conformance, and is free.
> >
> >Comeau offer a conforming C99 compiler (no library), but it's not free.
> >Dinkumware offer a conforming C99 library (no compiler), but it's not

free.
> >The two work together, fortunately.
> >
> >I have heard rumours that Intel offer a conforming C99 compiler (not

free),
> >and that there is at least one non-gcc free compiler that claims to
> >conform, but I have no idea how true these rumours are.

>
> To the best of my understanding, at least the following
> is the situation as regards C99 implementations:
>
> * Full: Comeau C/C++ (compiler) + Dinkumware (lib)
> For: many platforms
> * Full: IBM C for AIX version 6
> For: AIX
> * Intel C (at least compiler)
> For: x86
> * Full: Compaq/HP/Dec C (this has had various flavors)
> For: Unsure
> * Full: SGI C
> For: SGI platforms (MIPS IRIX I guess)
> * Full: Lund Multiprocessor Compiler Company
> For: PowerPC LINUX on Apple G4
> * Unsure: SAS/C
> For: IBM mainframes
> * Partial: gcc
> For: Many platforms
> * Partial: lcc-win32
> For: MS-Windows
>
> Only the latter two have "free" possibilities.
>
> As an aside, there is now a small number of book where C99 is
> discussed. Search for C99 at http://www.comeaucomputing.com/booklist
> --
> Greg Comeau/4.3.3:Full C++03 core language + more Windows backends
> Comeau C/C++ ONLINE ==> http://www.comeaucomputing.com/tryitout
> World Class Compilers: Breathtaking C++, Amazing C99, Fabulous C90.
> Comeau C/C++ with Dinkumware's Libraries... Have you tried it?


Intels compiler for Linux seems to be the logical choice at present.
Hopefully gcc and/or lcc-win32 will have full implementation of C99 in the
near future. Greg, a bold suggestion, how about a Comeau/Dinkumware
non-commercial version for Linux? It would be more than welcome-)

Thank you all for great inputs in the topic,
anders johansson


 
Reply With Quote
 
Greg Comeau
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-27-2003
In article <SmS2b.21389$(E-Mail Removed)>,
moses <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>"Greg Comeau" <(E-Mail Removed)> skrev i meddelandet
>news:bigbsj$7sf$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> In article <bidhgs$7lu$(E-Mail Removed)>,
>> Richard Heathfield <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> >Anders Johansson wrote:
>> >> I'd like to know if there exist a free C compiler which completely
>> >> fulfills the C99 standard. I would really appreciate if someone could
>> >> point me to one.
>> >
>> >Possibly.
>> >
>> >gcc is reasonably close to C99 conformance, and is free.
>> >
>> >Comeau offer a conforming C99 compiler (no library), but it's not free.
>> >Dinkumware offer a conforming C99 library (no compiler), but it's not
>> >free. The two work together, fortunately.
>> >
>> >I have heard rumours that Intel offer a conforming C99 compiler (not
>> >free), and that there is at least one non-gcc free compiler that
>> >claims to conform, but I have no idea how true these rumours are.

>>
>> To the best of my understanding, at least the following
>> is the situation as regards C99 implementations:
>>
>> * Full: Comeau C/C++ (compiler) + Dinkumware (lib)
>> For: many platforms
>> * Full: IBM C for AIX version 6
>> For: AIX
>> * Intel C (at least compiler)
>> For: x86
>> * Full: Compaq/HP/Dec C (this has had various flavors)
>> For: Unsure
>> * Full: SGI C
>> For: SGI platforms (MIPS IRIX I guess)
>> * Full: Lund Multiprocessor Compiler Company
>> For: PowerPC LINUX on Apple G4
>> * Unsure: SAS/C
>> For: IBM mainframes
>> * Partial: gcc
>> For: Many platforms
>> * Partial: lcc-win32
>> For: MS-Windows
>>
>> Only the latter two have "free" possibilities.


I should have also mentioned Metrowerks, which has partial
C99 support right now, and as I understand it, at least for
the Mac, will have pretty full support in their release
next week.

>> As an aside, there is now a small number of book where C99 is
>> discussed. Search for C99 at http://www.comeaucomputing.com/booklist

>
>Intels compiler for Linux seems to be the logical choice at present.


Maybe.

>Hopefully gcc and/or lcc-win32 will have full implementation of C99 in the
>near future.


Hopefully all implementations do.

> Greg, a bold suggestion, how about a Comeau/Dinkumware
>non-commercial version for Linux? It would be more than welcome-)


Comeau C/C++ is already offered at a low cost -- ridiculously
low cost, including free 24/7 tech support, free upgrades
since 1997 (no typo), and full core language support
(including strong gcc/g++ compatibility modes under LINUX).
And also the online compiler is available for free at
http://www.comeaucomputing.com/tryitout
I don't see any incentive to offer a full free version
though I guess it would be interesting to hear the case
for it.
--
Greg Comeau/4.3.3:Full C++03 core language + more Windows backends
Comeau C/C++ ONLINE ==> http://www.comeaucomputing.com/tryitout
World Class Compilers: Breathtaking C++, Amazing C99, Fabulous C90.
Comeau C/C++ with Dinkumware's Libraries... Have you tried it?
 
Reply With Quote
 
Kevin Easton
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-27-2003
Greg Comeau <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> In article <SmS2b.21389$(E-Mail Removed)>,
> moses <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

[...]
>> Greg, a bold suggestion, how about a Comeau/Dinkumware
>>non-commercial version for Linux? It would be more than welcome-)

>
> Comeau C/C++ is already offered at a low cost -- ridiculously
> low cost, including free 24/7 tech support, free upgrades
> since 1997 (no typo), and full core language support
> (including strong gcc/g++ compatibility modes under LINUX).
> And also the online compiler is available for free at
> http://www.comeaucomputing.com/tryitout
> I don't see any incentive to offer a full free version
> though I guess it would be interesting to hear the case
> for it.


I guess the idea would be that:

1) People programming C non-commercially are unlikely to fork out for a
compiler, no matter how ridiculously low cost it is.

2) If it were available freely to people for their non-commercial uses,
they would get familiar with it and would be more likely to use in in a
commercial environment.

So if the revenue gained from more commercial users is greater than the
revenue lost from paying non-commercial users, you'd come out in front.

It probably works better for a company with a well-known brand like
Intel than it does for one that the boss hasn't heard of.

- Kevin.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Richard Delorme
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-27-2003
Paul Hsieh a crit :

> (E-Mail Removed) (Greg Comeau) wrote in message
>> * Intel C (at least compiler)
>> For: x86

>
> Eh? Since when has Intel's compiler been C99 conformant?


According to its documentation, the current Intel's compiler for linux is
mostly conformant:

"The following C99 features are supported in this version of the Intel C++
Compiler when using the -c99[-] option:
Restricted pointers (restrict keyword, available with -restrict). See Note
below.
Variable-length Arrays
Flexible array members
Complex number support (_Complex keyword)
Hexadecimal floating-point constants
Compound literals
Designated initializers
Mixed declarations and code
Macros with a variable number of arguments
Inline functions (inline keyword)
Boolean type (_Bool keyword)"

[...]

"These features are not supported:

#pragma STDC FP_CONTRACT
#pragma STDC FENV_ACCESS
#pragma STDC CX_LIMITED_RANGE
long double (128-bit representations)"



--
Richard
 
Reply With Quote
 
Greg Comeau
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-27-2003
In article <(E-Mail Removed) >,
Paul Hsieh <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>(E-Mail Removed) (Greg Comeau) wrote in message
>> * Intel C (at least compiler)
>> For: x86

>
>Eh? Since when has Intel's compiler been C99 conformant? They don't
>mention it on their web site and since they require on MSVC++ for CRT
>support (I don't know what they do under Linux, but it wouldn't
>surprise me if they didn't just use the gcc libraries), and MSVC
>definately does *NOT* support C99, it does not seem likely at all that
>Intel C++ actually supports C99.
>
>I have version 4.0 (admittedly kind of old), and it definately doesn't
>have __STDC_VERSION defined, but perhaps the latest versions do?


To the best of my knowledge, the compiler proper can support
full C99. I do not believe it provides C99 RTL.
--
Greg Comeau/4.3.3:Full C++03 core language + more Windows backends
Comeau C/C++ ONLINE ==> http://www.comeaucomputing.com/tryitout
World Class Compilers: Breathtaking C++, Amazing C99, Fabulous C90.
Comeau C/C++ with Dinkumware's Libraries... Have you tried it?
 
Reply With Quote
 
Lew Pitcher
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-27-2003
Greg Comeau wrote:

> In article <(E-Mail Removed) >,
> Paul Hsieh <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>(E-Mail Removed) (Greg Comeau) wrote in message
>>
>>>* Intel C (at least compiler)
>>> For: x86

>>
>>Eh? Since when has Intel's compiler been C99 conformant? They don't
>>mention it on their web site and since they require on MSVC++ for CRT
>>support (I don't know what they do under Linux, but it wouldn't
>>surprise me if they didn't just use the gcc libraries), and MSVC
>>definately does *NOT* support C99, it does not seem likely at all that
>>Intel C++ actually supports C99.
>>
>>I have version 4.0 (admittedly kind of old), and it definately doesn't
>>have __STDC_VERSION defined, but perhaps the latest versions do?

>
>
> To the best of my knowledge, the compiler proper can support
> full C99. I do not believe it provides C99 RTL.


Intel's website
(http://intel.com/software/products/c....htm#standards)
advises that their C++ compiler for Windows (version 7.1) supports the "ANSI
C/C++ standard" and the "ISO C/C++ standard", what ever they are. (One
combined standard for /both/ C and C++? No date?)

Their website
(http://intel.com/software/products/c....htm#standards) for
their C++ compiler for Linux (version 7.1) supports "GNU inline ASM for IA
32 architecture", "IA32 support for C++ ABI object model", "ANSI C/C++
standard" and "ISO C/C++ standard". (Again, one combined standard for /both/
C and C++? No date?) I also note that the Linux version requires "system
with glibc 2.2.4 or 2.2.5 and the 2.4.X Linux kernel".

Going by the advertising, I can't tell if Intel's C compiler is C99 compliant.



--

Lew Pitcher, IT Consultant, Application Architecture
Enterprise Technology Solutions, TD Bank Financial Group

(Opinions expressed here are my own, not my employer's)

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Checking for whether compiler supports C99 or C++0x er ci C++ 12 08-18-2010 02:59 PM
C99 compiler soscpd C Programming 2 01-03-2009 12:46 PM
Difference between "library parts" of C99 and "language parts" of C99 albert.neu@gmail.com C Programming 3 03-31-2007 08:14 PM
C99 struct initialization (C99/gcc) jilerner@yahoo.com C Programming 3 02-20-2006 04:41 AM
How to check whether my GCC compiler support C99 standard or not? Peng Yu C++ 2 09-29-2004 04:09 PM



Advertisments