Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > C Programming > Embarcadero C/C++ Compiler available

Reply
Thread Tools

Embarcadero C/C++ Compiler available

 
 
Mel Smith
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-03-2013
Hi:

If you would like to test/try out the new 'Borland' C/C++ Compiler
(from Embarcadero) BCC 6.6.0, there is a link below.

This console-only compiler was extracted from the C++ Builder package
XE4

http://www.mediafire.com/?655px1guh9z5isy

--
Mel Smith


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Keith Thompson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-03-2013
"Mel Smith" <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> If you would like to test/try out the new 'Borland' C/C++ Compiler
> (from Embarcadero) BCC 6.6.0, there is a link below.
>
> This console-only compiler was extracted from the C++ Builder package
> XE4
>
> http://www.mediafire.com/?[DELETED]


Embarcadero offers a free 30-day trial of C++ Builder, which appears not
to be free software. I believe the above link is a copyright violation.

And I see no mention of C on their web page (perhaps I just didn't find
it), so it's not even clear this is topical.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Mel Smith
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-03-2013
Keith said:
> Embarcadero offers a free 30-day trial of C++ Builder, which appears not
> to be free software. I believe the above link is a copyright violation.


BullPucky ! Embarcadero is aware of this, and encourages it.
>
> And I see no mention of C on their web page (perhaps I just didn't find
> it)


No, its not advertisedf, just provided.

>, so it's not even clear this is topical.


a C-Language compiler is *not topical* ?!?

In my own news group, thoudsands of us use their BCC offerings:
including BCC5.8, BCC 6.5, and BCC 6.6.0

We don't sell it, only use it to compile our apps.


-Mel


 
Reply With Quote
 
Keith Thompson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-04-2013
"Mel Smith" <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> Keith said:
>> Embarcadero offers a free 30-day trial of C++ Builder, which appears not
>> to be free software. I believe the above link is a copyright violation.

>
> BullPucky ! Embarcadero is aware of this, and encourages it.


Perhaps you could provide some evidence of that. (That doesn't imply
that I disbelieve you.) If they're willing to allow their compiler to
be distributed for free, I wonder why they don't just do it themselves.
Or do they? If so, I'd frankly rather download it from their site than
from mediafire.com in a proprietary format (it's a .rar file).

>> And I see no mention of C on their web page (perhaps I just didn't find
>> it)

>
> No, its not advertisedf, just provided.
>
>>, so it's not even clear this is topical.

>
> a C-Language compiler is *not topical* ?!?


As I said, it *appeared* from the information I found in a cursory
examination of embarcadero.com to be just a C++ compiler. I just looked
again, and http://www.embarcadero.com/products/cbuilder says they
support both C and C++ -- including the C11 and C++11 standards. The
existence of a C compiler that supports (how well?) the C11 standard is
interesting news.

> In my own news group, thoudsands of us use their BCC offerings:
> including BCC5.8, BCC 6.5, and BCC 6.6.0


What is your "own news group"?

> We don't sell it, only use it to compile our apps.


Whether you sell it or not is not particularly relevant.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) (E-Mail Removed) <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
 
Reply With Quote
 
Luuk
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-04-2013
On 03-05-2013 18:40, Mel Smith wrote:
> Hi:
>
> If you would like to test/try out the new 'Borland' C/C++ Compiler
> (from Embarcadero) BCC 6.6.0, there is a link below.
>
> This console-only compiler was extracted from the C++ Builder package
> XE4
>
> http://....
>



Abstract: The free download version of the Borland C++ Compiler version
5.5 is now available.:
http://edn.embarcadero.com/article/20633

C++ Compiler 5.5
C++Builder Compiler (bcc compiler) free download. See the file
bcb5tool.hlp in the Help directory for complete instructions on using
the C++Builder Compiler and Command Line Tools. We recommend downloading
the C++Builder or RAD Studio Trial editions instead to get the latest
compilers for Windows and Mac with a complete IDE experience.
https://downloads.embarcadero.com/free/c_builder
 
Reply With Quote
 
Malcolm McLean
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-04-2013
On Saturday, May 4, 2013 2:29:33 AM UTC+1, Keith Thompson wrote:
> "Mel Smith" <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>
>
> As I said, it *appeared* from the information I found in a cursory
> examination of embarcadero.com to be just a C++ compiler.
>

I don't think it's possible to get a C++ compiler which won't compile files with
a .c extension as C. It would be possible to write one, of course, but the
extra effort involved in supporting at least some dialect of C is so small
that it would be a pointless exercise.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Kenny McCormack
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-04-2013
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Malcolm McLean <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>On Saturday, May 4, 2013 2:29:33 AM UTC+1, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> "Mel Smith" <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>>
>>
>> As I said, it *appeared* from the information I found in a cursory
>> examination of embarcadero.com to be just a C++ compiler.
>>

>I don't think it's possible to get a C++ compiler which won't compile files with
>a .c extension as C. It would be possible to write one, of course, but the
>extra effort involved in supporting at least some dialect of C is so small
>that it would be a pointless exercise.


I agree, but you must keep in mind that *most* of Keith Thompson's posts are
pointless exercises. Keith excels in pointless exercises[*].

Of course, one might also say that of the Usenet in general, but it, at least
among (nominally) technical groups, CLC and Keith Thompson are standout examples.
[*] Such as constantly reminding us that C and C++ are distinct languages, and
generally pretending that they are completely unrelated to each other - as
different as, say, C and Fortran.

--
"The anti-regulation business ethos is based on the charmingly naive notion
that people will not do unspeakable things for money." - Dana Carpender

Quoted by Paul Ciszek (pciszek at panix dot com). But what I want to know
is why is this diet/low-carb food author doing making pithy political/economic
statements?

Nevertheless, the above quote is dead-on, because, the thing is - business
in one breath tells us they don't need to be regulated (which is to say:
that they can morally self-regulate), then in the next breath tells us that
corporations are amoral entities which have no obligations to anyone except
their officers and shareholders, then in the next breath they tell us they
don't need to be regulated (that they can morally self-regulate) ...

 
Reply With Quote
 
Keith Thompson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-04-2013
Malcolm McLean <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> On Saturday, May 4, 2013 2:29:33 AM UTC+1, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> "Mel Smith" <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>>
>> As I said, it *appeared* from the information I found in a cursory
>> examination of embarcadero.com to be just a C++ compiler.
>>

> I don't think it's possible to get a C++ compiler which won't compile
> files with a .c extension as C. It would be possible to write one, of
> course, but the extra effort involved in supporting at least some
> dialect of C is so small that it would be a pointless exercise.


Maybe. Microsoft has certainly decided not to devote much further
effort to C. Their Visual Studio supports only C (plus a very few C99
features), and that's probably only because it already had that support,
since C is older than C++. I can imagine some vendor developing a new
C++ compiler from scratch and not bothering with C support.

But I don't know of any that have actually done so.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) (E-Mail Removed) <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
 
Reply With Quote
 
Malcolm McLean
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-04-2013
On Saturday, May 4, 2013 9:01:24 PM UTC+1, Keith Thompson wrote:
> Malcolm McLean <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>
> > On Saturday, May 4, 2013 2:29:33 AM UTC+1, Keith Thompson wrote:

>
>
> Maybe. Microsoft has certainly decided not to devote much further
> effort to C. Their Visual Studio supports only C (plus a very few C99
> features), and that's probably only because it already had that support,
> since C is older than C++. I can imagine some vendor developing a new
> C++ compiler from scratch and not bothering with C support.
>

Microsoft seem to have a policy of deliberately breaking legacy source
(but not legacy executables). However they daredn't do that to standard
C, because too many fundamental routines which applications developers
rely on and don't have the skills to write themselves are written in C.
 
Reply With Quote
 
glen herrmannsfeldt
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-04-2013
Malcolm McLean <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On Saturday, May 4, 2013 2:29:33 AM UTC+1, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> "Mel Smith" <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:


>> As I said, it *appeared* from the information I found in a cursory
>> examination of embarcadero.com to be just a C++ compiler.


> I don't think it's possible to get a C++ compiler which won't compile files with
> a .c extension as C. It would be possible to write one, of course, but the
> extra effort involved in supporting at least some dialect of C is so small
> that it would be a pointless exercise.


One thing that always bothered me about unix, as compared to some
DEC systems like VMS is the way it treats file extensions.

For VMS commands, most have a default extension, but will work fine
if you supply a different one.

One that always surprised me was the PRINT command default of .LIS,
though I rarely named my files that way, even if I did plan to PRINT
them.

Having not tried recently, I would expect a VMS C++ compiler to happily
compile C++ code with a .c extension, and the C compiler to compile
C code with a .cpp extension. (I don't remember if + is a legal
character in VMS file names or extensions.)

-- glen
 
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
Compiler Error Message: The compiler failed with error code -1073741819 Ram ASP .Net 0 09-13-2005 09:52 AM
Why is a JIT compiler faster than a byte-compiler RickMuller Python 4 03-26-2005 04:30 PM
Compiler compiler with C++ as output Andrey Batyuck C++ 3 05-17-2004 08:17 PM
Can we use <compiler> tag to avoid RunTime Compiler error? Jack Wright ASP .Net 5 01-19-2004 04:36 PM
Compiler Error Message: The compiler failed with error code 128. Yan ASP .Net 0 07-21-2003 10:49 PM



Advertisments