Dev-C++ compiling problem in Vista

[Antoninus Twink]

Microsoft software is much more user friendly not because they
have a BIG BUDGET, but because they care about the end user a
bit more... Unix has this problematic attitude of relying in the
"systems administrator", and just being unfriendly for no reason.

I don't think even MS's most passionate defenders would honestly say
that they care about the end user. What they care about is their bottom
line, and unfortunately that means they always tend to give people what
they want, rather than what they need.

Of course, in the long term this can fall apart. Nowadays even end users
like my grandmother would actually quite like to run an operating system
that had been designed with security in mind, give that almost all
desktop computers are now exposed to the internet. Another good example
is X Windows - it was built from the ground up using a solid, scalable
client-server architecture. That good long-term decision at the
beginning means that if you want to pull back an X window through ssh -
piece of cake; have different users logged in simulataneously running
different window managers - no problem. Compare that to the utter
nightmare of MS's remote desktop.

Personally I have tried to make a system that it is easy to use.
lcc-win tries (not always with success) to be easy to use, easy to
install, without adding features without need.

That sounds more like the Unix philosophy than the Windows one...

 

[santosh]

Soon [Linux distributuions] will be everybit as user-friendly as
any Windows [...]

<laughter>

Cheers. But frankly, I expected a more substantial response. Guess you
don't have one.

 

[Antoninus Twink]

Eclipse just calls gdb, and is happy with it

I'm interested to know what you think gdb is lacking. I've always though
of it as the Rolls Royce of debuggers - it certainly does everything I
want and more, and in an extremely usable environment.

 

[santosh]

I'm interested to know what you think gdb is lacking. I've always
though of it as the Rolls Royce of debuggers - it certainly does
everything I want and more, and in an extremely usable environment.

Ah, there is the point. I believe jacob doesn't believe gdb has
a "usable environment". Also he likes tight integration in IDEs, if I'm
right. Loose coupling is a Unix philosophy that many Windows people
just can't get themselves to appreciate or like.

 

[Bill Buckels]

Selling software under Linux is impossible, at least for
developers like most of us. Nobody will buy anything, linux distros
will make a war on you, etc. Software developers should be like
the ideal GNU developer: work for free for endless hours, and
work as pizza delivery man to feed your family.

I have been programming in unix and C for about as long as you have
and I have seen your other posts here as well so I know full well to
take what you say very seriously.

This time you have really "hit the nail on the head"! But the kids
won't listen and walk around beating their young chests until they
can't smoke pot anymore (and can't afford it either) while hopping
around with both feet shot up including each others feet since nobody
knows whose team they are on. The commies are trying to win the soft
war as well as the cold war and now we are clerks and paid as such and
may as well have been domino delivery men (sorry ladies if there be
any listening, but most of you are economically smart enough to be
pyschologists and such and leave the manly art of programming to the
ideal but starving GNU developer).

The only money in the local market around where I am is no longer in
developing full blown verticals but fortunately the mouse masters
can't do the low level stuff and the GNU guys who could are too busy
giving away their intellectual property for free and complaining about
those who don't mind making real money.

I have personal involvment with one very large and smart development
team who should have been wealthy and because they GNUed and open
sourced lost most and now they are scratching.

Follow the money kids and the coding will still be there is what I
say, n'est ce pas? Forget the wars against VISTA and Windows.

And if you haven't already done Windows Mobile development and used
some of Microsoft's excellent programming tools for WEB development
like those of us who actively code in a whorish manner in all
languages and OS's that we are paid to, you are missing being paid for
your fun, and are behaving like fundamentalists.

Bill

 

[Bill Buckels]

I don't think Eclipse of NetBeans (neither tied to one platform) can be
described as crappy.

Well perhaps not as such, but try developing a java and struts web
app, and writing all those stored procs and using reflection and all.
I mean a non-trivial one of course and not these little apps that all
the kids write before working for 20 years or so as a developer. And
oh yes you can conform to struts studio by exadel if you can get help
and even integrate CVS into eclipse if it suits you (it has always
suited me).

Then try writing and porting the same web app to Visual Studio using
ASP.NET and integrated VSS and such with a real framework and real
good debugging tools and watch your production increase magnificently.

Or try Windows Mobile development in eclipse. Like how do I step trace
through an RFID or Barcode Scanning application on a motorola handheld
device using whatever is in eclipse? The reason I am not an embedded
systems developer since I can write fluently in ASM as well as C is
because I generally don't need to be. I like the M$oft IDE and the
devkits that the embedded guys provide for Microsoft Development and
don't really care to reinvent wheels. I like money not changing tires.
I also like eclipse and netbeans. They like Java and are fun toys when
work is over or if my local univbersity wants me to teach a course
since they are free and the university doesn't need to provide
licences.

Imagine the silly thoughts that these students go into the work place
with

Bill

 

[Bill Buckels]

I don't think even MS's most passionate defenders would honestly say
that they care about the end user. What they care about is their bottom
line, and unfortunately that means they always tend to give people what
they want, rather than what they need.

I have heard that said before but don't believe it and I didn't just
get here.

Assuming for a second that I humour you and allow that they don't care
about the end user unless they pay money but they treat their partners
very well and we make a good living, why would you care? Think about
it.

Does a doctor "prescribe" herbs and vitamins when the drug companies
are pushing pills? No, he takes his kickback and percs and writes the
prescription. Society applauds him and in fact demands it. It is
quantifiable and everyone makes money.

When it comes to doctors and pills and drug advocacy (not just
software development) I have been there too and believe me I have the
t-shirt to prove it, and I would be pretty foolish not to learn how to
make money from the masters and apply it back to my own practice as a
consultant, considering just how unprofitable the GNUish business
model seems to be.

Bill

 

[Bill Buckels]

Loose coupling is a Unix philosophy that many Windows people
just can't get themselves to appreciate or like.

Tightly integrated IDE's are a joy to use. Try liking both and learn
as many languages as you can get paid to learn. Your client base could
very well expand and you could end-up cutting as much unix code as you
wish and hire the kids to write in the less agreeable languages.

There is no race on earth called "Windows People". There are those of
us who have written curses applications on AIX, HPUX, Sularis, XENIX,
etc AndAlso VB.NET apps that run in Mono on Linux, and everything else
between and who enjoy being well paid for having fun coding.

There are many children virtually fresh out of school that do not have
the breadth or the depth of experience to be citizens of the world so
speak only a single language and have no appreciation of other
coultries. While they write their resumes and look fgor work they give
away programs for nothing and since they cannot afford to purchase
compilers convince themselves that what they download for nothing is
just as good.

Bill

 

[jacob navia]

I'm interested to know what you think gdb is lacking. I've always though
of it as the Rolls Royce of debuggers - it certainly does everything I
want and more, and in an extremely usable environment.

1) GDB is a command line debugger. No real user interface, you have
to learn by heart a lot of obscure commands to do anything with it.
2) Even if it has been interfaced with every IDE in the world, it
doesn't have a real interface. The programs that use gdb just scan
gdb output...
3) edit and continue... That is one of the most challenging features of
Microsoft IDE. I haven't had the time to replicate it, it isn't very
easy to do
4) My debugger scans the text around the current line, and shows the
variables automatically. This avoids the terrible
print myvariable
in 90% of the cases... Gdb hasn't got anything like it.
5) I have fixed bugs in it, but none of my patches was even
acknowledged. GDB developers do not give a dam about anybody else.

And a long list that better goes unpublished.

 

[jacob navia]

Ah, there is the point. I believe jacob doesn't believe gdb has
a "usable environment". Also he likes tight integration in IDEs, if I'm
right. Loose coupling is a Unix philosophy that many Windows people
just can't get themselves to appreciate or like.

See my reply to Antoninus. I am FOR loose coupling, but that doesn't
mean that integration of different components is absent!

 

[Nick Keighley]

Yes and so what?
It can be bought if you want to develop a commercial product with it.
But for the OP and all the people that want an IDE, the binaries
are free.

so it isn't free. I was merely clarifying. Chances are the poster
wants it for a non-commercial purpose so it doesn't matter.

I don't think there is anything wrong with chargeing money
for software.

Perhaps you should dial down the attitude a bit?

 

[Nick Keighley]

Soon [Linux distributuions] will be everybit as user-friendly as
any Windows [...]

<laughter>

Cheers. But frankly, I expected a more substantial response. Guess you
don't have one.

Ok maybe you can read the future better than me. But Linux
is a very long way from the user friendlyness of Windows.
And I set the bar high "could my mum use it?".

I use windows and Linux regularly. And I know all about
the clean internals of Unix and the mess that is Win 32.
But from the outside you have to sweat to make Linux
usable by normal people. I may be wrong but I
can't see that being fixed any time soon.

 

[jacob navia]

I don't think there is anything wrong with chargeing money
for software.

OK. I was just paranoiac

Perhaps you should dial down the attitude a bit?

Excuse me.

But there are (specially in this group) people that
always attack me because I try to sell some parts of my
own work. So I get paranoiac.

 

[jacob navia]

Soon [Linux distributuions] will be everybit as user-friendly as
any Windows [...]
<laughter>

Cheers. But frankly, I expected a more substantial response. Guess you
don't have one.

Ok maybe you can read the future better than me. But Linux
is a very long way from the user friendlyness of Windows.
And I set the bar high "could my mum use it?".

I use windows and Linux regularly. And I know all about
the clean internals of Unix and the mess that is Win 32.
But from the outside you have to sweat to make Linux
usable by normal people. I may be wrong but I
can't see that being fixed any time soon.

Obviously, making Unix user friendly is possible. Steve Jobs
proved it with the Next, then, the MacIntosh. You have all
the power of Unix and a GOOD GUI.

Instead of doing that, the linux people waste their time in
endless replication of each other's work. There are half a dozen
window managers (gnome, kde, but also a next step clone, fvwim,
and several others) and NONE is as tightly integrated and easy to use
as vista.

Why?

Because they do not cooperate, i.e. they are not integrated. The
clipboard will work with most of the applications but not
with all. Since linus decided that enforcing standards is bad,
there are no official standards and everybody has his/her own standard.

Result, applications cannot cooperate.

There are 3 different sound systems, and now Ubuntu decided to
develop a new one. This one will be a "standard", say the Ubuntu
people.

Result: You never know which one you have to use in your application.
And if you decide to use one, there will be always problems with some
other system where the sound system is not the one you decide to
support.

And I could go on repeating myself. The basic fact is that linux
is financed by companies that need good servers for cheap: IBM/SUN.
They do not care about GUIs, user intrface whatever. And the linux
developers have no commercial model so the only solution is to
work for those companies that decide what will be developed.

There was, several months ago, a discussion of this when one of the top
kernel developers wanted to introduce a patch that would have
been better for game developing under linux but possible a little
bit bad for servers. (a scheduler modification).

The developer was kicked out and that was it. Linus decided that,
since he is the only dictator there, and servers must pass, and
game developers can go to hell since they do not finance linux.

You get what you pay for.

 

[Tomás Ó hÉilidhe]

You get what you pay for.

Or what you pirate for.

They should put a price tag on Linux so that it becomes better, and
then we can pirate it. They get money, we get a good OS. Both sides
win.

 

[Keith Thompson]

OK. I was just paranoiac


Excuse me.

But there are (specially in this group) people that
always attack me because I try to sell some parts of my
own work. So I get paranoiac.

Yes, you do, and this wasn't the only time.

For example, somebody recently pointed out a bug in lcc-win (it
declares "wtof" in <stdlib.h>, causing a legal program that uses that
identifier to fail). Your response was to flame many of the people
who mentioned it. You still haven't acknowledged that it's a problem.
There were also some questions about the "-ansic89" option, to which
you never gave a straight answer (doing so probably would have quickly
ended the argument).

This is *not* intended as an attack, jacob. I am asking you to sit
back for a moment and think about how you react to criticism. Yes,
some people do dislike you, but not everyone who criticizes you or
your compiler does so out of personal dislike.

One of the most valuable resources a programmer can have is a
community of experts eager to find bugs in his code. You have that
here, but you seem determined to reject it.

 

[Antoninus Twink]

1) GDB is a command line debugger. No real user interface, you have
to learn by heart a lot of obscure commands to do anything with it.

Well, to each his own, but there are many pieces of software (notably
one's text editor) that require a certain amount of learning to maximize
one's productivity with them. It's really an investment of time: by
learning how to use a tool well, you'll be saving time every day for the
rest of your life.

And most of gdb's commands are mnemonic, so I don't think it's fair to
call them obscure.

2) Even if it has been interfaced with every IDE in the world, it
doesn't have a real interface. The programs that use gdb just scan
gdb output...

This is a fair point.

3) edit and continue... That is one of the most challenging features of
Microsoft IDE. I haven't had the time to replicate it, it isn't very
easy to do

Often this will simply be impossible in a compiled language, depending
on how complicated the edit is. You can call make from inside gdb, which
is something...

4) My debugger scans the text around the current line, and shows the
variables automatically. This avoids the terrible
print myvariable
in 90% of the cases... Gdb hasn't got anything like it.

It has "info locals", "info scope some_function", "info variables", etc.
And it's extensible - IMO it's well worth the effort to write gdb macros
for things you find useful: a few Kb for ~/.gdbinit is disk space well
spent.

5) I have fixed bugs in it, but none of my patches was even
acknowledged. GDB developers do not give a dam about anybody else.

I haven't sent any patches, so I can't comment on that. Did they
actually use your patches without acknowledging them, or just ignore
them completely?

 

[Flash Gordon]

jacob navia wrote, On 06/05/08 06:38:

Bill Buckels wrote:
[snip]

Well Microsoft and C have both fed my family and friends for about 30
years now evn though they may seem mutually exclusive like Military
Intelligence, so I don't exactly get your point.

Selling software under Linux is impossible,

One of the biggest money spinners in my company currently runs on AIX
and Linux, with all but one customer on Linux and the code is even
written mostly in C. Oracle is sold for Linux. Plenty of other SW is
sold for Linux.

at least for
developers like most of us.

Maybe like you, but others are different.

Nobody will buy anything,

Wrong. As evidence the number of companies that sell SW to run under
Linux and the number that buy SW to run under Linux.

linux distros
will make a war on you, etc.

They don't seem to be making war on a lot of the successful SW sold to
run under Linux.

Software developers should be like
the ideal GNU developer: work for free for endless hours, and
work as pizza delivery man to feed your family.

So you still don't understand about selling other services on the back
of the SW.

 

[Eligiusz Narutowicz]

jacob navia wrote, On 06/05/08 06:38:

Bill Buckels wrote:
[snip]

Well Microsoft and C have both fed my family and friends for about 30
years now evn though they may seem mutually exclusive like Military
Intelligence, so I don't exactly get your point.

Selling software under Linux is impossible,

One of the biggest money spinners in my company currently runs on AIX
and Linux, with all but one customer on Linux and the code is even
written mostly in C. Oracle is sold for Linux. Plenty of other SW is
sold for Linux.

No, not "plenty" at all. Some server stuff is about it. There is about
no desktop market is is obvious to anyone with a passing interest in SW
development and business.

Maybe like you, but others are different.

A tiny minority perhaps.

Wrong. As evidence the number of companies that sell SW to run under
Linux and the number that buy SW to run under Linux.

i.e hardly any. Sorry. But at least asknowledge there is very, very
small market compared to Mac and Windows.

They don't seem to be making war on a lot of the successful SW sold to
run under Linux.

What succesful SW? And please do no say "oracle".

So you still don't understand about selling other services on the back
of the SW.

Other services like sys admin possibly. But designing a web for someone
and that web being put on linux is not really "developing sw for linux".

 

[jacob navia]

What succesful SW? And please do no say "oracle".


Other services like sys admin possibly. But designing a web for someone
and that web being put on linux is not really "developing sw for linux".

Oracle is precisely the software that confirms it: linux is for servers.
OBVIOUSLY you will find all data bases, (excluding Microsoft SQL server
maybe) represented under linux.

But tell me what popular games you can buy for linux?
There is Microsoft Office clone yes, but developed by SUN
and not for linux!