Q: Free compiler for 64 bit Windows 7?
Mok-Kong Shen
Please excuse me for a dumb question: Are there any
free C++ complier running on 64 bit Windows 7?
Thanks,
M. K. Shen
Balog Pal
> Please excuse me for a dumb question: Are there any
> free C++ complier running on 64 bit Windows 7?
Guess visual studio...
Balog Pal
Seem not completely painless in express, not sure if bug or feature...
http://jenshuebel.wordpress.com/2009/02/12/visual-c-2008-express-edition-and-64-bit-targets/
arunix
What about Dev C++?
Mick
What about asking in a Windoze newsgroup?
Maxim Yegorushkin
> Please excuse me for a dumb question: Are there any
> free C++ complier running on 64 bit Windows 7?
Yes, it is called gcc.
--
Max
tanix
:--}
A good one.
I did not even think of THAT one!
Everyone seems to be so frightened of Microsux,
that they do not even believe such a thing as free
C++ 64 compiler is even legal unless it comes from Microsucks.
--
Programmer's Goldmine collections:
Tens of thousands of code examples and expert discussions on
C++, MFC, VC, ATL, STL, templates, Java, Python, Javascript,
organized by major topics of language, tools, methods, techniques.
arunix
> What about asking in a Windoze newsgroup?
Because its gcc based compiler.
Dev-C++ is a full-featured Integrated Development Environment (IDE)
for the C/C++ programming language. It uses Mingw port of GCC (GNU
Compiler Collection) as it's compiler. Dev-C++ can also be used in
combination with Cygwin or any other GCC based compiler.
Features are :
- Support GCC-based compilers
- Integrated debugging (using GDB)
- Project Manager
- Customizable syntax highlighting editor
- Class Browser
- Code Completion
- Function listing
- Profiling support
- Quickly create Windows, console, static libraries and DLLs
- Support of templates for creating your own project types
- Makefile creation
- Edit and compile Resource files
- Tool Manager
- Print support
- Find and replace facilities
- CVS support
Pete Becker
>> What about asking in a Windoze newsgroup?
>
> Because its gcc based compiler.
Oh, of course: a gcc based compiler for Windows isn't a Windows compiler.
Sigh. gcc is just as off-topic as Windows.
--
Pete
Roundhouse Consulting, Ltd. (www.versatilecoding.com) Author of
"The Standard C++ Library Extensions: a Tutorial and Reference"
(www.petebecker.com/tr1book)
tanix
>arunix wrote:
>>> What about asking in a Windoze newsgroup?
>>
>> Because its gcc based compiler.
>
>Oh, of course: a gcc based compiler for Windows isn't a Windows compiler.
>
>Sigh. gcc is just as off-topic as Windows.
What is this "off-topic" bullshit?
Have you heard of cygwin?
arunix
James
news:hgo4p8$8hn$01$1...@news.t-online.com...
>
> Please excuse me for a dumb question: Are there any
> free C++ complier running on 64 bit Windows 7?
You could give Visual Studio 10 Express Beta 2 a try:
Pete Becker
> In article <Re2dncsqjrDaXa3W...@giganews.com>, Pete Becker <pe...@versatilecoding.com> wrote:
>> arunix wrote:
>>>> What about asking in a Windoze newsgroup?
>>> Because its gcc based compiler.
>> Oh, of course: a gcc based compiler for Windows isn't a Windows compiler.
>>
>> Sigh. gcc is just as off-topic as Windows.
>
> What is this "off-topic" bullshit?
>
> Have you heard of cygwin?
>
Yes, I'm familiar with cygwin. It's just as off-topic in this newsgroup
as "gcc" and "Windows compilers".
Dann Corbit
13g2000prl.googlegroups.com>, arr...@gmail.com says...
Web searches will turn up stuff like this:
http://www.thefreecountry.com/compilers/cpp.shtml
http://www.cadforte.com/system64.html
tanix
>tanix wrote:
>> In article <Re2dncsqjrDaXa3W...@giganews.com>, Pete Becker
> <pe...@versatilecoding.com> wrote:
>>> arunix wrote:
>>>>> What about asking in a Windoze newsgroup?
>>>> Because its gcc based compiler.
>>> Oh, of course: a gcc based compiler for Windows isn't a Windows compiler.
>>>
>>> Sigh. gcc is just as off-topic as Windows.
>>
>> What is this "off-topic" bullshit?
>>
>> Have you heard of cygwin?
>>
>
>Yes, I'm familiar with cygwin. It's just as off-topic in this newsgroup
>as "gcc" and "Windows compilers".
Who ARE you to dictate things like these to some of the most intelligent
people one can find and whose brains function well above average?
If you think it is "off-topic", here is the best advice I know of
about things like this, directly from the horses mouth,
Russ Allbery. Do you know who he is?
"If you don't like something, do not read it.
Do not follow up on it.
Just forget about it".
Simple, isn't it?
Or you think you are some kind of traffic light here,
and what YOU think or perceive is some kind of standards
all others are to be measured agains?
Do you know what this trip is called?
Well, fascism and totalitarian dictate.
Just enjoy things if you find it interesting here.
If you don't, nobody holds you by your hand and FORCES you
to read anything. It is YOUR choice.
Just go find a "better" or "cleaner" place,
such as those dictatorship outlets, called the "moderated" groups.
That is MUCh healthier for individuals of your kind,
the "blue blooded" "elite".
There is a group, called c.l.c++.m.
Do I have to tell you THESE kinds of things?
In other words, do not insult the intelligence of highly intelligent
people. Very few of them will appreciate this, especially considering
the fact I do not know even who you are and what is YOUR word worth.
Not that I reviewed enough of material on these groups to even
notice you in the scheme of things.
Just a sec. Lemme make sure you get the same treatment.
I put people like you on some lists to make sure you just dissapear
from pg collections so there is not a trace of you left.
Oh, I see, you were on the expert list. Not any longer.
Cya.
Alf P. Steinbach
> In article <RKKdnft88JlPiazW...@giganews.com>, Pete Becker <pe...@versatilecoding.com> wrote:
>> tanix wrote:
>>> In article <Re2dncsqjrDaXa3W...@giganews.com>, Pete Becker
>> <pe...@versatilecoding.com> wrote:
>>>> arunix wrote:
>>>>>> What about asking in a Windoze newsgroup?
>>>>> Because its gcc based compiler.
>>>> Oh, of course: a gcc based compiler for Windows isn't a Windows compiler.
>>>>
>>>> Sigh. gcc is just as off-topic as Windows.
>>> What is this "off-topic" bullshit?
>>>
>>> Have you heard of cygwin?
>>>
>> Yes, I'm familiar with cygwin. It's just as off-topic in this newsgroup
>> as "gcc" and "Windows compilers".
>
> Who ARE you to dictate things like these to some of the most intelligent
> people one can find and whose brains function well above average?
Pete is the one actually writing (editing) the C++ standard.
I think Pete's wrong about the topicality; at least discussions about available
C++ tools and GCC as an answer would be on-topic by the [clc++m] charter and
moderation guidelines, as I see it (both James Kanze and I are moderators
there), and assuming that my evaluation of that is correct, it would be a little
incongruous to regard it as off-topic in this group, which lacks a charter!
Btw., it's amazing what kinds of people you meet on the net. ;-)
Cheers & hth.,
- Alf
tanix
>* tanix:
>> In article <RKKdnft88JlPiazW...@giganews.com>, Pete Becker
> <pe...@versatilecoding.com> wrote:
>>> tanix wrote:
>>>> In article <Re2dncsqjrDaXa3W...@giganews.com>, Pete Becker
>>> <pe...@versatilecoding.com> wrote:
>>>>> arunix wrote:
>>>>>>> What about asking in a Windoze newsgroup?
>>>>>> Because its gcc based compiler.
>>>>> Oh, of course: a gcc based compiler for Windows isn't a Windows compiler.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sigh. gcc is just as off-topic as Windows.
>>>> What is this "off-topic" bullshit?
>>>>
>>>> Have you heard of cygwin?
>>>>
>>> Yes, I'm familiar with cygwin. It's just as off-topic in this newsgroup
>>> as "gcc" and "Windows compilers".
>>
>> Who ARE you to dictate things like these to some of the most intelligent
>> people one can find and whose brains function well above average?
>
>Pete is the one actually writing (editing) the C++ standard.
Oh, shitski!
Then I Have to put him back on the expert list.
Who knows, he might say something useful once in a while.
Ok, we'll do that. I can't let my ego stand on the way of information.
>I think Pete's wrong about the topicality; at least discussions about available
>C++ tools and GCC as an answer would be on-topic by the [clc++m] charter and
>moderation guidelines, as I see it (both James Kanze and I are moderators
>there), and assuming that my evaluation of that is correct, it would be a
> little
> incongruous to regard it as off-topic in this group, which lacks a charter!
Well, I just thought about this about half an hour ago,
and would like to mention it here.
It is GREAT that there exists a parallel, "moderated" group.
That means THIS group is not going to be taken over by those
"moderators", who, for some strange reason think THEY are the
ultimate reference on that, which IS and which is NOT.
Most of the "moderators" I had experience to deal with
are simply sick, power obscessed dictators, PERVERSELY
affecting the information flow with their lil ego trips.
It has been a disaster to what happened to Usenet.
Usenet is the LAST resourse left to mankind that is not dominated
and censored to the point of suffocations.
No web forums or blogs can provide uncensored discussions.
No IRC will do that.
Just because of this central concept of totalitarian dictate
called "moderation", where the MOST immoderate people end up
decidin on what kind of information all others are to see.
The decay of Usenet is probably the biggest disaster there is.
And I would advise ANYONE to do whatever they can to make sure
Usenet never dies.
For one thing, Usenet is the MOST robust, fully distributed
system, that supports and delivers ANY kind of information
conceivable, whithin the limitations imposed by the highest
level dictators, such as Jim Skirvin, one of the most despicable
and most evil people in the entire history of "big-8".
He has a key and HE decides which groups are to be created and
which groups are to be removed. And this pervert went to the
ultimate level of totalitarian sickness, and created a group
news.admin.moderation, meant to discuss the issues of this
ugly "moderation" thing, and made it "moderated", where HE
is the "moderator", and that sucker is the most immoderate
nazi I saw to date more or less.
Yes, when people publish some commercial stuff to buy this and that,
that is clearly an issue. But even there, there is nothing you can
do about it, more or less.
But you never know which discussion may fade away into what,
and what may come out of it. And you never know who is going
to be interested in seeing what kind of information or deciding
to participate in it.
Because this is HIGLY subjective.
Furthermore, I, personally, think it is a pitty that C++ has been
fragmented as badly as it is, to the point of obsene.
What IS the problem if someone talks about HIS version of C++,
be it GCC or VC or anything else for that matter?
You ALREADY have threads. If you don't like some thread
becasue you think you are a world caliber "scientist" and
YOU define what C++ is, then do not read that stuff.
But do not prevent OTHERS, who do want to read that stuff
from reading it.
I think it would be MUCH more beneficial if ANY C++ related
discussions could be conducted on a single forum.
You can easily create things like [GCC:], or [VC++] in the subject
header just like they do all over the place.
And instead, if you can not discuss threads, or GUI aspects
or ALL sorts of other things in one place. Because it is considered
to be "unclean" by some "experts", that, for some strange reason,
can not even slow down the relative decay of C++ as a language
as it is being replaced in more and more cases with dynamically
scope languages.
Again, your house is on fire. Nothing less than that.
>Btw., it's amazing what kinds of people you meet on the net. ;-)
>Cheers & hth.,
>
>- Alf
--
tanix
>tanix wrote:
>> In article <Re2dncsqjrDaXa3W...@giganews.com>, Pete Becker
> <pe...@versatilecoding.com> wrote:
>>> arunix wrote:
>>>>> What about asking in a Windoze newsgroup?
>>>> Because its gcc based compiler.
>>> Oh, of course: a gcc based compiler for Windows isn't a Windows compiler.
>>>
>>> Sigh. gcc is just as off-topic as Windows.
>>
>> What is this "off-topic" bullshit?
>>
>> Have you heard of cygwin?
>>
>
>Yes, I'm familiar with cygwin. It's just as off-topic in this newsgroup
>as "gcc" and "Windows compilers".
You don't OWN this group
and it is not your private kitchen.
And you are not an authorised controller of the global information
streams, no matter how big of a fart you think you are.
I just hope that people with your mentality can really offers
some contribution to the language without creating the totally
perverted verions of all sorts of mechanism, just because of their
sadistic tendencies.
It is a pitty people like you are involved in language design
and definitions. You look like a power hungry politician to me.
I doubt you can contribute to the language anything of real power,
beauty or flexibility it so badly needs, at least from now on.
Because its days are numbered in more cases than not.
red floyd
Bo Persson
> In article <hgrhcm$5ba$1...@news.eternal-september.org>, "Alf P.
> Steinbach" <al...@start.no> wrote:
>
>> C++ tools and GCC as an answer would be on-topic by the [clc++m]
>> charter and moderation guidelines, as I see it (both James Kanze
>> and I are moderators there), and assuming that my evaluation of
>> that is correct, it would be a little
>> incongruous to regard it as off-topic in this group, which lacks
>> a charter!
>
> Well, I just thought about this about half an hour ago,
> and would like to mention it here.
>
> It is GREAT that there exists a parallel, "moderated" group.
> That means THIS group is not going to be taken over by those
> "moderators", who, for some strange reason think THEY are the
> ultimate reference on that, which IS and which is NOT.
>
The moderated list was started by people who couldn't stand reading
the unmoderated list at the time. It's your choice which groups you
want to follow.
Nowadays many of us (including most of the moderators :-) actually
read both groups, just not to miss any interesting topics.
Bo Persson
James
news:hgrgf9$r9h$2...@news.eternal-september.org...
> In article <RKKdnft88JlPiazW...@giganews.com>, Pete Becker
> <pe...@versatilecoding.com> wrote:
>>tanix wrote:
>>> In article <Re2dncsqjrDaXa3W...@giganews.com>, Pete Becker
>> <pe...@versatilecoding.com> wrote:
>>>> arunix wrote:
>>>>>> What about asking in a Windoze newsgroup?
>>>>> Because its gcc based compiler.
>>>> Oh, of course: a gcc based compiler for Windows isn't a Windows
>>>> compiler.
>>>>
>>>> Sigh. gcc is just as off-topic as Windows.
>>>
>>> What is this "off-topic" bullshit?
>>>
>>> Have you heard of cygwin?
>>>
>>
>>Yes, I'm familiar with cygwin. It's just as off-topic in this newsgroup
>>as "gcc" and "Windows compilers".
>
> Who ARE you to dictate things like these to some of the most intelligent
> people one can find and whose brains function well above average?
>
> If you think it is "off-topic", here is the best advice I know of
> about things like this, directly from the horses mouth,
> Russ Allbery. Do you know who he is?
>
> "If you don't like something, do not read it.
> Do not follow up on it.
> Just forget about it".
>
> Simple, isn't it?
Why can't you follow you're own advise moron! If you don't like something
Pete wrote, do not read it. Do not follow up on it. Just forget about it!
Wow, what a total dipsh%t!!!!!!!!!!!
:^|
Chris M. Thomasson
> In article <RKKdnft88JlPiazW...@giganews.com>, Pete Becker
> <pe...@versatilecoding.com> wrote:
>>tanix wrote:
>>> In article <Re2dncsqjrDaXa3W...@giganews.com>, Pete Becker
>> <pe...@versatilecoding.com> wrote:
>>>> arunix wrote:
>>>>>> What about asking in a Windoze newsgroup?
>>>>> Because its gcc based compiler.
>>>> Oh, of course: a gcc based compiler for Windows isn't a Windows
>>>> compiler.
>>>>
>>>> Sigh. gcc is just as off-topic as Windows.
>>>
>>> What is this "off-topic" bullshit?
>>>
>>> Have you heard of cygwin?
>>>
>>
>>Yes, I'm familiar with cygwin. It's just as off-topic in this newsgroup
>>as "gcc" and "Windows compilers".
>
> You don't OWN this group
> and it is not your private kitchen.
> And you are not an authorised controller of the global information
> streams, no matter how big of a fart you think you are.
You seem to be easily irritated. Do you happen to suffer from high blood
pressure and/or an anti-social disorder?
Balog Pal
"Bo Persson" <b...@gmb.dk>
> Nowadays many of us (including most of the moderators :-) actually read
> both groups, just not to miss any interesting topics.
With the 1 day moderation delay clcm is as good as dead. :( If there is no
manpower to process stuff within a few hours there could be at least an
author whitelist for auto-approve, until there is an evident problem.
James Kanze
> tanix wrote:
[...]
> The moderated list was started by people who couldn't stand reading
> the unmoderated list at the time. It's your choice which groups you
> want to follow.
> Nowadays many of us (including most of the moderators :-) actually
> read both groups, just not to miss any interesting topics.
Some historical context might be interesting. The moderated
group was founded because this group became pretty much
unusable, because of too many off topic postings. I was one of
the founders: I hate censorship, but at the time, it was that or
not having any usable group at all.
Since then, things have changed: all of the newbies have moved
on to other mechanisms, and with some exceptions, leave
newsgroups alone. The result is that this group has become
usable again. That, coupled with the fact that moderation in
the moderated group has become more heavy handed than I
originally envisaged it, means that I pretty much only
participate here, and not in the moderated group. But... I
would like for this group to remain usable, and that means some
degree of self moderation. An occasional off topic posting, or
even a thread which derives completely off topic, doesn't hurt
that much, but it can't become a regular thing, or the group
becomes unusable. (Similarly, overuse of personal insults and
ad hominum attacks renders the group less usable.) It's a fine
line, and I'd prefer that the non-moderated group remain usable.
And FWIW: I agree with Alf on this one, although it's a
borderline case. The question wasn't "what compilers are
available", but "what compilers are available for Windows".
Which is definitely Windows specific. But since it does concern
more than one implementation (potentially, at least, and in fact
in practice), I'd be in favor of stretching the rules.
--
James Kanze