Visual Studio Help

Discussion in 'C++' started by Goonigooguu, Jul 29, 2003.

  1. Goonigooguu

    Goonigooguu Guest

    Help! I am looking to download an evaluation version of Microsoft Visual
    Studio 6.0 to practice some C++ programming or alternatively a similar
    program which is easy to use and learn basic C++ on. Can anyone point me in
    the right direction please?
    --

    ..... and then he stuck a G.I. Joe up his ass!
     
    Goonigooguu, Jul 29, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. "Goonigooguu" <> wrote in message
    news:bg4dmi$c6n$...
    >
    > Help! I am looking to download an evaluation version of Microsoft Visual
    > Studio 6.0 to practice some C++ programming or alternatively a similar
    > program which is easy to use and learn basic C++ on. Can anyone point me

    in
    > the right direction please?


    There is no such thing. You could download a complete version of gcc (a much
    better C++ compiler than Visual Studio 6) for free from here www.cygwin.com.

    john
     
    John Harrison, Jul 29, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Goonigooguu

    slick_shoes Guest

    "John Harrison" <> wrote in message
    news:bg528n$ku0bk$-berlin.de...
    >
    > "Goonigooguu" <> wrote in message
    > news:bg4dmi$c6n$...
    > >
    > > Help! I am looking to download an evaluation version of Microsoft Visual
    > > Studio 6.0 to practice some C++ programming or alternatively a similar
    > > program which is easy to use and learn basic C++ on. Can anyone point me

    > in
    > > the right direction please?

    >
    > There is no such thing. You could download a complete version of gcc (a

    much
    > better C++ compiler than Visual Studio 6) for free from here

    www.cygwin.com.
    >
    > john
    >
    >


    or get a free alternative,dev-c++, which uses the MingW compiler, a windows
    port of gcc for a more 'friendly' environment for windows. comes with
    windows headers too, allowing you to program win32 apps.

    dev-c++: http://www.bloodshed.net/dev/devcpp.html

    slick_shoes
     
    slick_shoes, Jul 29, 2003
    #3
  4. Goonigooguu

    Greg P. Guest

    Dev-C++ is definitely something you should check out. The fact that it comes
    with an IDE is great. GCC (MinGW) is an excellent compiler.

    Another possibility is Digital Mars which I currently use for Win32
    (windows) stuff:
    http://www.digitalmars.com

    If you want another old-school compiler, like Digital Mars (which was
    Symantec), get the free Borland compiler. Note that it does not come with an
    IDE:
    http://www.borland.com

    IDE stands for Integrated Development Environment. It is also sometimes
    called an IDDE, when appropriate, for Integrated Development and Debugging
    Environment. Most good IDE's have syntax highlighting for special keywords
    and code completion.

    If you choose a compiler that has no IDE or don't care to use their's, you
    can always try SourceEdit: http://www.sourceedit.com

    Good luck!

    --

    Regards,
    Greg P.

    Golden Rule of Open Source Programming:
    "Don't whine about something unless you plan to implement it yourself"
     
    Greg P., Jul 29, 2003
    #4
  5. The free Borland 5.5 compilor is not a quick download, you have to
    follow these instuctions to install it:
    http://csjava.occ.cccd.edu/~gilberts/bcc55.html
    VIDE is a good IDE to use with the Borland 5.5 compiler. Its supposed
    to work just by typing in the dictory path c:\Borland\bcc55 into the
    options>VIDE dialog, but I havent been able to get it to work.
     
    Arquebus257WeaMag, Jul 29, 2003
    #5
  6. Victor- Im just starting out in programming and so still qualify as a
    computer dummy. So just because I didnt get it to work doesnt mean it
    doesnt work (the problem might be with my comp). Lets make clear that
    Borland C++ 5.5 is a very good compiler that follows ANSI standards
    closer than MS visual C++ (which doesnt even follow the current ANSI
    standard). I dont imagine you would want to use this compiler with the
    default command line interface, so getting an IDE and a debugger to
    work with this compiler is neccesary for normal use. Heres a link
    where you can download VIDE and theres a link at the bottom of the
    page that gives instructions on how to set it up with Borland C++ 5.5:
    http://www.objectcentral.com/vide.htm
    >
    > If you "haven't been able to get it to work", how can it be
    > "a good IDE to use with the Borland 5.5. compiler"? In my book
    > inability to make something to work with something else is
    > a BAD THING(tm).
    >
    > Victor
     
    Arquebus257WeaMag, Jul 30, 2003
    #6
  7. On 29 Jul 2003 17:44:14 -0700, (Arquebus257WeaMag) wrote:

    >Lets make clear that
    >Borland C++ 5.5 is a very good compiler that follows ANSI standards


    That is incorrect.


    >closer than MS visual C++ (which doesnt even follow the current ANSI
    >standard).


    That is incorrect.


    >I dont imagine you would want to use this compiler with the
    >default command line interface


    That is incorrect.


    >so getting an IDE and a debugger to
    >work with this compiler is neccesary for normal use.


    I suggest Dev++ IDE with MingW g++ compiler, both free.
     
    Alf P. Steinbach, Jul 30, 2003
    #7
  8. Goonigooguu

    Greg P. Guest

    "Alf P. Steinbach" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > >Lets make clear that
    > >Borland C++ 5.5 is a very good compiler that follows ANSI standards

    >
    > That is incorrect.

    How so? I have used both MSVC and Borland (since early on) and noticed BCC
    holding truer to the ANSI standard than VC (which requires some code
    augmentation). From what I've heard, VC 7.1 is starting to fix this.

    > >I dont imagine you would want to use this compiler with the
    > >default command line interface

    >
    > That is incorrect.

    I agree with you on this. I enjoy using the console for compiling rather
    than hitting some build button. But I'm also old-school.

    > >so getting an IDE and a debugger to
    > >work with this compiler is neccesary for normal use.

    >
    > I suggest Dev++ IDE with MingW g++ compiler, both free.

    I suggest this as well. GCC, IMHO, is much better than either bcc or msvc.
    Either that or I am just too used to it.
     
    Greg P., Jul 30, 2003
    #8
  9. "Goonigooguu" <> wrote...
    > Thanks all. Bloodsheds Dev-C++ works just fine but I do have other

    question.
    > Usually is start my main() as follows without a return:
    >
    > void main()
    > {
    > //code body
    > }
    >
    > This causes a problem with Dev-C++ and I have to use:
    > int main()
    > {
    > //code body
    > system("PAUSE")
    > return 0;
    > }
    >
    > Is this a problem or normal. Please explain in laymans terms. Thanks.


    In layman's terms, 'void main' is non-standard. If you want to write
    _correct_ C++, you should use 'int main'. "return 0;" is unnecessary
    from the main function; it will return 0 by default. Some compilers
    have a problem with that. It's up to you to decide to use those
    compilers and to put up with their non-compliance.

    Dev-C++ causes the executable window to close before you can see the
    results. That is why you need to use 'system("PAUSE")', which is not
    guaranteed to work on all systems anyway. It is up to you to use the
    tools that you've chosen in the way that helps you do your work. It
    has nothing to do with the language.

    Victor
     
    Victor Bazarov, Jul 30, 2003
    #9
  10. Goonigooguu

    Goonigooguu Guest

    Thankx

    --

    ..... and then he stuck a G.I. Joe up his ass!


    "Victor Bazarov" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "Goonigooguu" <> wrote...
    > > Thanks all. Bloodsheds Dev-C++ works just fine but I do have other

    > question.
    > > Usually is start my main() as follows without a return:
    > >
    > > void main()
    > > {
    > > //code body
    > > }
    > >
    > > This causes a problem with Dev-C++ and I have to use:
    > > int main()
    > > {
    > > //code body
    > > system("PAUSE")
    > > return 0;
    > > }
    > >
    > > Is this a problem or normal. Please explain in laymans terms. Thanks.

    >
    > In layman's terms, 'void main' is non-standard. If you want to write
    > _correct_ C++, you should use 'int main'. "return 0;" is unnecessary
    > from the main function; it will return 0 by default. Some compilers
    > have a problem with that. It's up to you to decide to use those
    > compilers and to put up with their non-compliance.
    >
    > Dev-C++ causes the executable window to close before you can see the
    > results. That is why you need to use 'system("PAUSE")', which is not
    > guaranteed to work on all systems anyway. It is up to you to use the
    > tools that you've chosen in the way that helps you do your work. It
    > has nothing to do with the language.
    >
    > Victor
    >
    >
     
    Goonigooguu, Jul 30, 2003
    #10
  11. Goonigooguu wrote:
    > Thanks all. Bloodsheds Dev-C++ works just fine but I do have other question.
    > Usually is start my main() as follows without a return:

    1. Don't top-post. Replies are either interspersed or appended
    at the bottom.

    > void main()
    > {
    > //code body
    > }
    >
    > This causes a problem with Dev-C++ and I have to use:
    > int main()
    > {
    > //code body
    > system("PAUSE")
    > return 0;
    > }
    >
    > Is this a problem or normal. Please explain in laymans terms. Thanks.

    As stated many times in this newsgroup and news:comp.lang.c,
    the main() function returns an int. Always. No exception.
    Anything else provokes undefined behavior. As to what normal
    is, that is a misleading term.

    The correct form for a minimalist C++ program is:
    int main()
    {
    }

    According to the standard, the main() function is the only
    function that has a default return value. Constructors
    are special functions that don't return values. Better
    form for the main function is:
    int main(void) // or (int, char **)
    {
    return EXIT_SUCCESS; // or EXIT_FAILURE
    }

    Read the FAQ and welcome.txt via the links below.

    --
    Thomas Matthews

    C++ newsgroup welcome message:
    http://www.slack.net/~shiva/welcome.txt
    C++ Faq: http://www.parashift.com/c -faq-lite
    C Faq: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/c-faq/top.html
    alt.comp.lang.learn.c-c++ faq:
    http://www.raos.demon.uk/acllc-c /faq.html
    Other sites:
    http://www.josuttis.com -- C++ STL Library book
     
    Thomas Matthews, Jul 30, 2003
    #11
  12. Thomas Matthews wrote:

    >The correct form for a minimalist C++ program is:
    >int main()
    >{
    >}
    >
    >According to the standard, the main() function is the only
    >function that has a default return value. Constructors
    >are special functions that don't return values. Better
    >form for the main function is:
    >int main(void) // or (int, char **)


    The practice of using a 'void' argument list is meaningful in
    C (do you know _why_ it is meaningful in C?).

    It's not meaningful in C++.

    It's not a good idea to use meaningless constructs, and so
    this form is absolutely not "better" in C++: it is inferior.



    >{
    > return EXIT_SUCCESS; // or EXIT_FAILURE
    >}


    This can be a good idea. Note: EXIT_SUCCESS is not predefined
    in C++. It is defined by various header files.
     
    Alf P. Steinbach, Jul 30, 2003
    #12
    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. wh
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    526
    Cowboy \(Gregory A. Beamer\)
    Jan 16, 2004
  2. Thirumalai
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    671
    Thirumalai
    May 22, 2006
  3. rockdale
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    618
    Juan T. Llibre
    Aug 23, 2006
  4. xman
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    509
  5. xman
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    607
    Victor Bazarov
    Aug 17, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page