Visual C++ Express Edition or lcc-win32?

Discussion in 'C Programming' started by Nimmi Srivastav, Sep 2, 2007.

  1. 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?

    Thanks,
    Nimmi
     
    Nimmi Srivastav, Sep 2, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. 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?


    I've used MS compilers (with various success) from around 1990, and
    eventually (unfortunately, only recently) they got quite decent. I
    cannot vouch for their C[99] support, but their C++ compliance is
    very good. They produce fast code, and the project management in
    their IDE is not bad at all.

    What's "lcc"?

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


    I don't know that, sorry.

    V
    --
    Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
    I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask
     
    Victor Bazarov, Sep 2, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Nimmi Srivastav

    CBFalconer Guest

    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?


    lcc-win32 is not a C++ compiler. There is no such language as
    C/C++. There are many compilers that can handle both C and C++,
    but they have to be told what to compile in some manner or other.
    If you want to just develop standard C programs, look into DJGPP
    and its port of gcc. For GUI stuff, consider mingw or cygwin, and
    their ports of gcc. All free, and all can handle both C and C++.
    Avoid Visual C, because it will try to lock you into various
    non-portable Microsoftianisms. Similarly lcc-win32. Read the gcc
    documentation, and always use "-ansi -pedantic -W -Wall" until you
    have very good (and rare) reasons to use non-standard coding. This
    is written with a view to using C, on c.l.c.

    Don't cross-post between c.l.c and c.l.c++.

    --
    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
     
    CBFalconer, Sep 2, 2007
    #3
  4. * Victor Bazarov:
    >
    > What's "lcc"?


    Used to be relevant in the 1990's. As I understand it, essentially one
    man's opinion on which extensions should really be there in C and C++.
    And he implemented it. One must respect that. But I think, now not so
    relevant any more.

    --
    A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
    Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
    A: Top-posting.
    Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
     
    Alf P. Steinbach, Sep 2, 2007
    #4
  5. "Alf P. Steinbach" <> writes:
    > * Victor Bazarov:
    >> What's "lcc"?

    >
    > Used to be relevant in the 1990's. As I understand it, essentially
    > one man's opinion on which extensions should really be there in C and
    > C++. And he implemented it. One must respect that. But I think, now
    > not so relevant any more.


    There's a distinction between lcc and lcc-win32. I'm not clear on the
    details; if you're curious, ask in comp.compilers.lcc. (Neither of
    the is a C++ compiler, though lcc-win32 implements some C++-like
    extensions to C.)

    --
    Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) <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"
     
    Keith Thompson, Sep 2, 2007
    #5
  6. Nimmi Srivastav said:

    > 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?


    A perusal of the comp.lang.c posting history of the latter will induce
    you to select the former. But they are not the only two choices -
    mingw32 is basically gcc-for-Windows, and is well worth a look. Having
    said that, VC++ is a good compiler (at least for C, anyway, and
    apparently its C++ conformance has improved in recent years, too, but
    the clc++ crowd will correct me on that if I'm mistaken).

    > Does anyone have any opinion to share?


    It is very, very, very, very, very rare for me to recommend a Microsoft
    product, but I have occasionally recommended Visual C to people needing
    a Windows implementation. And if the only choice is between Emperor
    Palpatine and Jar-Jar Binks, what can you do but join the Dark Side?

    (But there /are/ other alternatives. See above.)


    > 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.

    --
    Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
    Email: -www. +rjh@
    Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
    "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
     
    Richard Heathfield, Sep 2, 2007
    #6
  7. Nimmi Srivastav

    jacob navia Guest

    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?
    >
    > Thanks,
    > Nimmi
    >


    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.

    Libraries: Supports 100 digits precision floating point, bignums
    and 128 bit integers as extended types (using operator
    overloading).
    Statistics library.
    Garbage collector
    String library (Using operator overloading) that uses
    counted strings and NOT zero terminated ones.
    Matrix library.
    Environment: IDE, windowed debugger, resource editor, project
    management.
    Price: Free download. Size: around 5MB. All this is written
    in C. Generates very small programs.

    Bugs: Only the 32 bit windows version is well tested.
     
    jacob navia, Sep 2, 2007
    #7
  8. Nimmi Srivastav

    jacob navia Guest

    Richard Heathfield wrote:
    > 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.
    >



    You can't post anything without insults...

    This is nice. You do not have any arguments anymore.

    jacob
     
    jacob navia, Sep 2, 2007
    #8
  9. Nimmi Srivastav

    jacob navia Guest

    Victor Bazarov wrote:
    > 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?

    >
    > I've used MS compilers (with various success) from around 1990, and
    > eventually (unfortunately, only recently) they got quite decent. I
    > cannot vouch for their C[99] support, but their C++ compliance is
    > very good. They produce fast code, and the project management in
    > their IDE is not bad at all.
    >
    > What's "lcc"?
    >
    >> Also, is there a C++ compiler akin to lcc-win32?

    >
    > I don't know that, sorry.
    >
    > V


    Please see my other post in this thread.
     
    jacob navia, Sep 2, 2007
    #9
  10. Nimmi Srivastav

    jaysome Guest

    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?


    I suggest you try both and make up your own mind. I have (and I prefer
    VC++ 2005). As others have mentioned, there are other alternatives,
    and you should consider those as well.

    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.

    Since you asked about compilers running on Windows, I'll tell you that
    one of my favorite "compilers" is PC-lint:

    http://www.gimpel.com/

    Note that PC-lint is not free, so it may not be suitable for a
    hobbyist, depending on your definition of a hobbyist.

    Best regards
    --
    jay

    P.S.
    PC-lint also runs on Linux, provided you run it in a Windows emulator
    such as WINE.

    P.S.2
    PC-lint runs fine under Windows Vista 32-bit and 64-bit versions.

    P.S.3
    The last time I checked, there was no 64-bit version of WINE.
     
    jaysome, Sep 2, 2007
    #10
  11. "jacob navia" <> wrote in message
    news:46da731b$0$25918$...
    > 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
     
    Malcolm McLean, Sep 2, 2007
    #11
  12. jacob navia <> 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.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"
     
    Keith Thompson, Sep 2, 2007
    #12
  13. On Sun, 2 Sep 2007 10:20:25 +0100, in comp.lang.c , "Malcolm McLean"
    <> wrote:

    >
    >"jacob navia" <> 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
     
    Mark McIntyre, Sep 2, 2007
    #13
  14. Nimmi Srivastav

    Army1987 Guest

    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
     
    Army1987, Sep 2, 2007
    #14
  15. Nimmi Srivastav

    jacob navia Guest

    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.
     
    jacob navia, Sep 2, 2007
    #15
  16. Nimmi Srivastav

    jacob navia Guest

    Malcolm McLean wrote:
    >
    > "jacob navia" <> wrote in message
    > news:46da731b$0$25918$...
    >> 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.
     
    jacob navia, Sep 2, 2007
    #16
  17. Nimmi Srivastav

    Richard Guest

    Richard Heathfield <> 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.
     
    Richard, Sep 2, 2007
    #17
  18. Nimmi Srivastav

    CBFalconer Guest

    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
     
    CBFalconer, Sep 2, 2007
    #18
  19. On 2 Sep, 09:39, jaysome <> 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.
     
    tragomaskhalos, Sep 2, 2007
    #19
  20. Nimmi Srivastav

    BobR Guest

    jacob navia <> 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
     
    BobR, Sep 2, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. clintonG

    NEW: Visual C# Express Edition

    clintonG, Jun 29, 2004, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    572
    Cowboy \(Gregory A. Beamer\) [MVP]
    Jun 30, 2004
  2. Wagner Dias
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    3,062
    Andre Kostur
    Mar 28, 2005
  3. hunkgym
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,989
    =?Utf-8?B?TGVvbiBNYXluZQ==?=
    Oct 30, 2006
  4. apex.z
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    322
    apex.z
    Nov 23, 2005
  5. Nimmi Srivastav

    Visual C++ Express Edition or lcc-win32?

    Nimmi Srivastav, Sep 2, 2007, in forum: C++
    Replies:
    70
    Views:
    3,476
    Jerry Coffin
    Sep 11, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page