Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > C Programming > Visual C++ Express Edition or lcc-win32?

Reply
Thread Tools

Visual C++ Express Edition or lcc-win32?

 
 
Malcolm McLean
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-02-2007

"jacob navia" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:46da731b$0$25918$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Nimmi Srivastav wrote:
> I am the author of lcc-win32. This is a C compiler that implements
> the latest standard C99 under windows. There is a 64 bit version
> in the works, and there are 64 and 32 bits versions under linux
> and AIX.
>
> Price: Free download. Size: around 5MB. All this is written
> in C. Generates very small programs.
>
>

If you don't mind me asking, how do you make money on it if you give the
compiler away for free? It doesn't sound like a hobby project.

--
Free games and programming goodies.
http://www.personal.leeds.ac.uk/~bgy1mm

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Keith Thompson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-02-2007
jacob navia <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
[...]
> I am the author of lcc-win32. This is a C compiler that implements
> the latest standard C99 under windows. There is a 64 bit version
> in the works, and there are 64 and 32 bits versions under linux
> and AIX.
>
> Language: C99 plus compatible extensions, operator overloading and
> generic functions. Other minor extensions like default
> arguments are accepted.

[...]

Have you finished implementing C99?

About a year ago, in comp.compilers.lcc, you wrote:
| Designated initializers and structure initializers with the
| dot notation are missing.
|
| I am giving priority to the library, that is kind of
| "mostly" finished. I have probably some problems with
| complex numbers, there hasn't been a good testing of that
| part.
|
| Besides the preprocessor is still missing the variable
| arguments feature.

If these features are still missing, please don't claim that it
implements C99.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Mark McIntyre
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-02-2007
On Sun, 2 Sep 2007 10:20:25 +0100, in comp.lang.c , "Malcolm McLean"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
>"jacob navia" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message


>> Price: Free download.
>>

>If you don't mind me asking, how do you make money on it if you give the
>compiler away for free? It doesn't sound like a hobby project.


Free for *non-commercial* use.

--
Mark McIntyre

"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it."
--Brian Kernighan
 
Reply With Quote
 
Army1987
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-02-2007
On Sat, 01 Sep 2007 17:54:41 -0700, Nimmi Srivastav wrote:

> Apologies if my cross posting has offended anyone....
>
> For a pure hobbyist C/C++ programmer, who wants to develop
> applications to run on Windows, what would be a better choice to
> install: Visual C++ Express 2005 Edition or lcc-win32? Does anyone
> have any opinion to share?
>
> Also, is there a C++ compiler akin to lcc-win32?


If you don't need C99 support and can wait for 90MB to download,
use MSVC. Its long double is eight bytes, but at least the fractal
picture I generate computing with them isn't yellowed by a bug
which prevents a three byte struct from being returned correctly.
Also it doesn't have the upper limits of some unsigned types
suffixed with LL without any U. And I didn't get any assertion
failure from its compiler yet.
--
Army1987 (Replace "NOSPAM" with "email")
No-one ever won a game by resigning. -- S. Tartakower

 
Reply With Quote
 
jacob navia
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-02-2007
Army1987 wrote:
> On Sat, 01 Sep 2007 17:54:41 -0700, Nimmi Srivastav wrote:
>
>> Apologies if my cross posting has offended anyone....
>>
>> For a pure hobbyist C/C++ programmer, who wants to develop
>> applications to run on Windows, what would be a better choice to
>> install: Visual C++ Express 2005 Edition or lcc-win32? Does anyone
>> have any opinion to share?
>>
>> Also, is there a C++ compiler akin to lcc-win32?

>
> If you don't need C99 support and can wait for 90MB to download,
> use MSVC. Its long double is eight bytes, but at least the fractal
> picture I generate computing with them isn't yellowed by a bug
> which prevents a three byte struct from being returned correctly.


??? This was fixed at least a year ago. Can you send a test
example?

> Also it doesn't have the upper limits of some unsigned types
> suffixed with LL without any U.


Either it is a fixed bug since ages or you are talking nonsense.

In limits.h I have
#define ULLONG_MAX 18446744073709551615ULL

> And I didn't get any assertion
> failure from its compiler yet.


Can you provide an example?

Obviously a typo invalidates all other features of this compiler.

Using MSVC of course prevents you from all bugs since it is
a well known thing that Microsoft has never any bugs.

 
Reply With Quote
 
jacob navia
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-02-2007
Malcolm McLean wrote:
>
> "jacob navia" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:46da731b$0$25918$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Nimmi Srivastav wrote:
>> I am the author of lcc-win32. This is a C compiler that implements
>> the latest standard C99 under windows. There is a 64 bit version
>> in the works, and there are 64 and 32 bits versions under linux
>> and AIX.
>>
>> Price: Free download. Size: around 5MB. All this is written
>> in C. Generates very small programs.
>>
>>

> If you don't mind me asking, how do you make money on it if you give the
> compiler away for free? It doesn't sound like a hobby project.
>


The project is financed by the paying customers.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Richard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-02-2007
Richard Heathfield <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

>
> I don't know of any C++ compilers ostensibly written by self-serving
> buffoons, but of course it's entirely possible that this is merely
> ignorance on my part.


And you should now. On both counts.
 
Reply With Quote
 
CBFalconer
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-02-2007
Richard Heathfield wrote:
> Nimmi Srivastav said:
>

.... snip ...
>
>> Also, is there a C++ compiler akin to lcc-win32?

>
> I don't know of any C++ compilers ostensibly written by self-serving
> buffoons, but of course it's entirely possible that this is merely
> ignorance on my part.


I think this is an unnecessary dig.

--
Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
<http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

 
Reply With Quote
 
tragomaskhalos
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-02-2007
On 2 Sep, 09:39, jaysome <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> In my experience, the more compilers you can compile your code with
> the better. C compilers are free to issue diagnostics for anything and
> everything. That's not to say that compilers abuse this and emit
> diagnostic messages on a whim, even when nothing is wrong with your
> code. On the contrary, compilers emit diagnostic warnings for good
> reason. And some compilers do it better than others.


This is excellent advice; even at a hobbyist level you should
always have at least two compilers to check your code against;
it's amazing the range of subtle and not-so-subtle snafus you
can make that one compiler will let through but that another
will catch, and vice-versa, at least in my experience.

 
Reply With Quote
 
BobR
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-02-2007

jacob navia <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message...
>
> Using MSVC of course prevents you from all bugs since it is
> a well known thing that Microsoft has never any bugs.
>


BSOD is a *feature*.
If you don't like it, upgrade (hey, it's only another $400!).

--
Bob <G> R
POVrookie


 
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
VB.Net of Visual Studio.Net 2003 VS Visual Basic 2005 Express Edition hunkgym ASP .Net 1 10-30-2006 03:10 PM
Visual Web Developer Express Edition should be free John Dalberg ASP .Net 6 09-13-2004 04:04 PM
Is Visual Web Developer 2005 Express Edition going to be free? Curt_C [MVP] ASP .Net 6 08-25-2004 02:55 AM
Think twice before you install "Visual Web Developer 2005 Express Edition Beta1" on your developement machine. bredal Jensen ASP .Net 5 07-07-2004 10:58 AM
NEW: Visual C# Express Edition clintonG ASP .Net 3 06-30-2004 01:51 PM



Advertisments