Slashdot Mirror
Free Optimizing C++ Compiler from Microsoft
FortranDragon writes "Microsoft has made the command line toolkit for Visual C++ available for a free download. You can use the toolkit to build applications and redistribute them if you want (though you should read the EULA for the details, as always). This is a nice boon for those that have to deal with cross-platform compatibility, especially since Microsoft has tried to make Visual C++ more conformant to the ISO C++ standard. Go forth and compile your favorite OSS or FS programs today. ;-)"
The page seems to indicate that the .net runtime might be installed on your machine if you execute the download; can anyone who has done it confirm this for me? I don't want to have to drive a wooden stake through my CPU. .net in my house. it activates all my tin foil hat's little buzzers and lights.
I'm a MCSE, but I would never purposfully allow
Why, yes, I AM a Pagan Libertarian.
gcc not standards compliant? well it might not be 100% C++ ISO yet, but its a hell of a lot closer than the M$ equivalent!! (if the grandparent was JUST using BCC, i would agree wholeheartedly with you)
especially since Microsoft has tried to make Visual C++ more conformant to the ISO C++ standard
More ISO conformant? Compared to what? The GNU Fortan77 compiler?
Seriously though, VC++ didn't even support member templates until 6.0. I'm not that familiar with VS.NET, but I know before that there ISO bordered between horrible and pathetic.
In all fairness, I've been told it's not there fault. Something to do with litigation or something.
At any rate, I think this statement of "more standards complaint" certainly could be explained a bit more (especially in terms of how are they more compliant than say, a C++ compiler built with EDG).
int func(int a);
func((b += 3, b));
m$ has the inside track because winblows has many undocumented functions that m$ doesnt tell anyone about....aka CHEATING!!!!
So the cost of Microsoft's optimizing C++ compiler is down from 1,089 USD (Microsoft Visual Studio) to 207 USD (Microsoft Windows 2000 Upgrade plus the .NET Framework SDK).
Why use it over the open source MinGW tools?
i just downloaded it. not only does it not have an IDE, it doesn't even have nmake
Marge, get me your address book, 4 beers, and my conversation hat.
Micro$oft is desperate to keep ahead of OSS in recruiting developers. That's how they became the leaders in business software: when all you have is a M$ developer, every problem looks like a M$ program. But OSS is getting new developers in droves, especially the new ones, who drive the industry with innovation, lack of old bad paradigms, enthusiasm, low labor cost, long hours and highly social recruitment and indoctrination. So now M$ is trying to appeal to that population of developers, with a free (beer) *command line* tool.
This is a watershed event. Not only can we now port Linux/BSD/AmigaOS/MVS programs which run on Windows without subsidizing M$' other divisions which unfairly compete with us, but M$ is tacitly acknowledging that its monopoly is under siege at its developer foundations. Soon M$ will be sitting pretty on the 31st Century equivalent of an army COBOL programmers. And the swarm of mutating global OSS programmers will carry the day.
--
make install -not war
I am also gay. Check this out. http://www.livejournal.com/community/gaygeeks/ ... but I am too poor as a student for any mac.
;-)
However I would be anyone's bitch if they bought me a powerbook.
Seriously FOSS is alive and kicking in win32. You have activePerl, activePython, activeTLC/TK. Hell perl.net is almost done.
Not to mention apache, php, etc. Infact the win32 version of php requires visual studio in source form to compile, and integrates quite well with IIS.
Not to mention their is mingw which is the port of gcc and g++. And bloodshed.net which is the corrosponding gui that is only available for Windows. gVIM and Emacs are also ported.
Windows makes a great easy to use development platform and it is splitting already. Like I mentioned bloodshed and perl.net.
http://saveie6.com/
How'd that get modded informative? In ANSI C, you don't need the include to use printf. Please STFU, since you obviously don't know what you're talking about.
It's always a long day... 86400 doesn't fit into a short.
No, you don't. In C, calling an undeclared function implicitly declares it as taking a indeterminate number of arguments and returning an int. Another person who doesn't know what they're talking about... again, please STFU.
It's always a long day... 86400 doesn't fit into a short.