Compiler

[David]

What's a good compiler that will take me through the learning process and
function well enough for some time after I have learned the basics of C++?
I am considering a good Borland product, but which one?

 

[Rolf Magnus]

What's a good compiler that will take me through the learning process
and function well enough for some time after I have learned the basics
of C++?

That depends on the operating system you want to use for compilation and
the system where your target programm will run. However, GNU g++ is
available for a wide range of build and target platforms, so that could
be a good start. Newer versions are quite good wrt standard compliance.

 

[David]

Yes, I'm familiar with g++; but I am a sucker when it comes to packaging and
compilers. I like the bells and whistles.
I am using MS Windows on an Intel platform and that is my intended audience
right now, although I would like to port some code if it is good enough.

 

[Dave Townsend]

David,

I learned C++ though VC++, it takes away a lot of the chores of
writing makefiles, etc., you can concentrate on the language side of
things. I've tried the Borland products, it might be I'm too VC++ centric,
but I found their interface a bit fiddly, like you have different keys for
each
short cut. Sorry, my fingers are hardwired right now... Also, VC++'s
debugger
is really cool. Oh that was VC++6, the 2003 .nET is entirely bollocks and
so is
the product too. Oh that language may not be the lingua pura and theres a
lot of bugs
and limitations, but you can get on quickly to learn the language.


Still, a GUI style approach will save you a lot of time, just punch in some
code
from the text book/web whatever, and get it to run. A lot better than in
the old days
with Cfront et al.

dave

 

[Petec]

David,

I learned C++ though VC++, it takes away a lot of the chores of
writing makefiles, etc., you can concentrate on the language side of
things. I've tried the Borland products, it might be I'm too VC++
centric, but I found their interface a bit fiddly, like you have
different keys for each
short cut. Sorry, my fingers are hardwired right now... Also, VC++'s
debugger
is really cool. Oh that was VC++6, the 2003 .nET is entirely
bollocks and so is
the product too. Oh that language may not be the lingua pura and
theres a lot of bugs
and limitations, but you can get on quickly to learn the language.

VC++ 2003 supports .Net, but does not in any way require you to use it. Its
standard C++ support is almost perfect, and much better than 6. It compiles
to excellently optimized native code. The debugger is also much better than
6.

- Pete

 

[Petec]

What's a good compiler that will take me through the learning process
and function well enough for some time after I have learned the
basics of C++? I am considering a good Borland product, but which one?

For starters, I would suggest Microsoft Visual C++ 2003 for an IDE, using
this newer version of the compiler (free download):
http://msdn.microsoft.com/visualc/vctoolkit2003/

If you want, the free compiler is also the best stand-alone command-line
compiler, comes with an implementation of the standard library, and you can
write Windows programs with it also.

- Pete

 

[Petec]

For starters, I would suggest Microsoft Visual C++ 2003 for an IDE,
using this newer version of the compiler (free download):
http://msdn.microsoft.com/visualc/vctoolkit2003/

I forgot to mention, just get the Standard edition, NOT the Pro or
Enterprise. The free compiler I linked to contains the important
Professional features (the better compiler).
FYI, VC++ 2003 Standard is ~$90.

- Pete