Page 1 of 1

Question for programmers out there...

Posted: Mon Oct 21, 2002 9:59 am
by seval
Just starting C++ , seeing the source code has me very interested. Wanted to know, what would be the best (free) C++ compiler out there for WinXP or Pro2000. Wanted one that could make distributable executables (unlike DJGPP or Borland). Am palnning to buy one...if I can figure out how to use the language.

Posted: Mon Oct 21, 2002 10:16 am
by Jamesk
If you're buying one for general C++ development on the win platform then MS Visual C++ would be an interesting choice.
On the other hand, if you're about to use it primarily for playing with the Blender code it appears that you would want to use Cygwin instead - and you can't buy that because it's free!

Posted: Mon Oct 21, 2002 10:54 am
by _florian_
with cygwin i ran into a problem i was not able to solve (yet?).
cygwin does not have a libdl library. a short google search showed
that i'm not the only one with this problem. this forced me to use MSVC.
MSVC is pretty cool if you like IDE's. and the debugger is very good.
but it's also very expensive.

_florian_

Posted: Mon Oct 21, 2002 12:50 pm
by xype
_florian_ wrote:but it's also very expensive.


Visual C++ .NET Standard is listed for $ 89.99 on amazon.com - I think one can work fine with that version

Amazon link[/url]

Posted: Mon Oct 21, 2002 1:24 pm
by _florian_
89.99$? ok. sounds great. then i meant the visual studio enterprise.
this one IS expensive. but 90$ should be ok for everyone.
thanks.

Posted: Mon Oct 21, 2002 3:36 pm
by IoN_PuLse
.NET is evil, evil I tell you!

Posted: Mon Oct 21, 2002 3:48 pm
by beergeek
IoN_PuLse wrote:.NET is evil, evil I tell you!
Don't you mean its .EVIL? hehehehe Sorry couldn't resist :D

Posted: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:25 pm
by _florian_
IoN_PuLse wrote:.NET is evil, evil I tell you!
you don't have to use the .NET part. i don't like it too.
i use MSVC6.
with .NET i had to buy a supercomputer. it's very slow on
"older" machines.
the .NET framework is just another lock in from MS.
even if they tell you it's portable.

so if you can get a MSVC6 copy get one.

_florian_

Posted: Mon Oct 21, 2002 7:15 pm
by xitnalta
_florian_ wrote:with cygwin i ran into a problem i was not able to solve (yet?).
cygwin does not have a libdl library.
libdl is (AFAIK) a static library that you can use to plugin-enable your applications by enabling to load dynamic libraries at runtime. I don't know whether it is so Unix-specific that it only applies to the *.so files (GNU - other Unices may have different library endings) and you would have to look for another method for *.dll files (Win32).

Posted: Mon Oct 21, 2002 10:24 pm
by nlin
xype wrote: Visual C++ .NET Standard is listed for $ 89.99 on amazon.com - I think one can work fine with that version

Amazon link[/url]
I would be very careful with "discount" versions of compilers. Very often, you are not allowed to redistribute binaries you create with such a compiler, and you are only allowed to use the compiler for non-commercial purposes. I don't know the details for this particular product, and you can probably only find out the details (in the End User License Agreement, the EULA) *after* you have paid $89.99.

Posted: Mon Oct 21, 2002 10:42 pm
by FNG
Hmm is Blender classed as commercial anyway?
As far as im aware it is the full version.It is 89.99 because it is only Visual C++. With Visual studio you get a number of programming lanuages with it, like Visual Java and visual source safe and the MSDN docs, which are handy for learning from.

Could be completly wrong though :?

Any thoughts on Dev C++ ?

Posted: Mon Oct 21, 2002 10:49 pm
by seval
This is one that I am suprised nobody mentioned. And also...
by "distributable", I did not mean for commercial purposes.
I am not looking to sell anything yet,(not for a long while) but I want to know that if I create a binary, it will run on other Win32 machines.

Re: Any thoughts on Dev C++ ?

Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2002 1:53 am
by xitnalta
seval wrote:This is one that I am suprised nobody mentioned. And also...
by "distributable", I did not mean for commercial purposes.
I am not looking to sell anything yet,(not for a long while) but I want to know that if I create a binary, it will run on other Win32 machines.
To be exact, it is even illegal to use a non-commercial-stuff-only compiler to compile copylefted free software (such as what is under the GNU GPL) and then give it away, since the binary can't be used in a commercial way by the people that receive it, which is a requirement of the GNU GPL. (Ok, it's actually the other way round - it doesn't forbid commercial use, but it also says that you mustn't restrict what it grants, which is everything that it does not prohibit. Ooops - how late it is! Good night.)

Re: Any thoughts on Dev C++ ?

Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2002 4:13 am
by seval
.[/quote]
To be exact, it is even illegal to use a non-commercial-stuff-only compiler to compile copylefted free software (such as what is under the GNU GPL) and then give it away, [/quote]

Okay...I never said ANYTHING about giving anything to anybody. And this does not have anything to do with the blender source code anyway. I am learning C++ to help someone work on a voice recognition lip-sync program and by "distributable", I only meant that I could bring it to another machine. I didn't feel that the word "portable"would have properly described what I wanted to accomplish. In the future , I would like to hae a lip-sync script better than the magpie dopesheet script I saw out there.
Anyway, I know there are alot of beginning programmers using blender out there, so I thought that this would be an excellent forum to post my question. I really did not mean to "disturb"anyone.

Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2002 8:24 am
by psingh01
You can download a free C/C++ comipler from Borland. It is command line only, but it's free and works fine. Dev-C++ at bloodshed.net is ok too, and comes with a nice IDE.