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. ;-)"

22 of 953 comments (clear)

  1. Weird Output by naden · · Score: 5, Funny

    I just tried the following program:

    #include

    main()
    {
    printf ("Hello World!\n");
    }

    And I got the output "Hello Suckers" .. anyone have any idea why ?

    --
    Funtage Factor: Purple
    1. Re:Weird Output by ion_ · · Score: 5, Funny

      And I got the output "Hello Suckers" .. anyone have any idea why ?

      I tried it as well, the bug exists indeed. The \n really was missing from the output.

  2. MS seems to be doing a lot of this lately... by Amiga+Lover · · Score: 5, Interesting

    MS seems to be doing a lot of this lately. It's nowhere near as open as F/OSS solutions, but it's freeing up access to what's possible with Windows far more than previously.

    One of the reasons for the success of OSX is the general geek crowd's appreciation of it's *IX background, but without free dev tools that's nothing but another flavour of unix. Add the ability to dive into developing instantly and there's tens of thousands more developers working for the company.

    1. Re:MS seems to be doing a lot of this lately... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      just to clarify this Apple's dev tools ARE included, just NOT installed by DEFAULT.

      EVERY new machine SHOULD come with a separate developer's CD just as every boxed version of OSX should. The end user just has to apply some elbow grease in a) noticing this, and b) bothering to install it.

      Also in the unlikely event that the developer CD is not present or there is an upgrade it is ALWAYS available(even to free online developer members) as a download. Hell even the old classic dev toolset(name escapes me at the moment) has been available free since, what?, 1994/5 or so?

      The only commercial environments are things like Codewarrior(Metrowerks), Absoft FORTRAN, RealBASIC, etc. Codewarrior MIGHT be worth it if you are trying to make money as their compilers are proprietary and USUALLY optimize much better than gcc. (I don't think that anyone has done a recent set of benchmarks of Apple's latest improvements of gcc v. current Metrowerks compiler though...) ...and now that I'm thinking of it most OSes of recent years, free AND proprietary seem to come with some sort of gcc based plus IDE dev tools any more anyways, e.g. BeOS, *Linux, *BSD, OSX, MacOS 7.5-9.x etc. On top of this didn't M$ used to have pretty decent pricing(surprisingly) for VC++/dev studio only anyways? (It's been a while since I've bothered to check.)

    2. Re:MS seems to be doing a lot of this lately... by SoSueMe · · Score: 5, Informative

      The very first thing it does is try to configure .net on your machine.

      Since my only Windows machine is 98, it couldn't complete the rest of the install.

      Yes, it is a sacrificial test machine. I just wanted to see the EULA.

    3. Re:MS seems to be doing a lot of this lately... by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well I think Microsoft has found out what the biggest threat to their business. It isn't the quality, security or price of their software that makes them popular. It is and always has been how much software is available for their platform. Since the DOS days up to Win 95 or 98 (I am not sure which) Microsoft always packaged some development software with their OS. Although it was usually just BASIC but still it got people programming for them. After they got their market share they stopped giving away their development software, Then hobby developers who often turn professional developers start switching to Linux and OS X because there are development tools out there for them to program. Now over a long period of time as the old windows software companies merge go out of business, consoled or got bought out, there are less software titles available for windows. And the new programmers out there are programming in Linux and OS X get use to programming in that environment and when they make a professional grade application they release it for that platform. So after a while the software titles available to Linux and OS X could match or exceed that of Windows thus Microsoft will then need to find a way to make up the the long period of time of developers.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    4. Re:MS seems to be doing a lot of this lately... by zulux · · Score: 5, Funny

      One could alomst say that it was developers that drive the sucuess of a operating saystem. Without developers, Linux woulden be anwhere. It's time thank all the Linux and *BSD developers, and GNU developers and other Open-Source developers. We need more Developers! Developers! Developers!

      --

      Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

    5. Re:MS seems to be doing a lot of this lately... by andalay · · Score: 5, Funny

      Perhaps what you meant to say is:

      Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers!Whooooo... Cmon. C-c-c-c-cmon!

      If you don't get it, thats ok too

  3. Yes! by Flingles · · Score: 5, Funny

    "tried to make Visual C++ more conformant to the ISO C++ standard"

    Score one for the team! Microsoft conformed to something!

    --
    Karma: -2^0.5 . Mainly due to the imbibing of dihydrogen monoxide
  4. platform SDK by halfdan+the+black · · Score: 5, Informative

    The platform SDK which includes the command line compiler, linker and debugger has allways been a free download (hasn't it). Also, the .net SDK which includes all the languages, libraries, and compilers has also allways been a free download, this is what sharp develop uses.

  5. Re:My experience with VC++ by sweet+cunny+muffin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So you write shit code that doesn't fit the standards ("liberal" code), your shitty compiler doesn't notice and compiles it anyway, and then it's Microsoft's fault when their standards conforming compiler won't compile it?

  6. Re:Not needed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    There's a decent free IDE available called Dev-C++ for windows, it comes with mingw32 ofcourse.

  7. Clippy's response to compiling OSS by foidulus · · Score: 5, Funny

    Clippy: "It looks like you are trying to compile the gimp, did you know the GPL was written by Carl Marx, you don't want to be un-American do you? If you need help embracing capitalism, please ask me."

  8. Re:My experience with VC++ by startup.cmd · · Score: 5, Informative
    Anyone know where to get a free visual debugger for Win32?

    MS provides the Debugging Tools for Windows as a free download. GUI and command line debuggers are included.

  9. Re:Not needed by tesmako · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because it starts to feel like I have wasted several years of my life waiting for g++ by now. g++ is probably the slowest compiler I have ever used.

  10. Re:goes both ways... by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 5, Funny
    CC was the most liberal of them all, it would complile and run your email.

    This highlights once again how Windows is a more flexible and modern development platform than Un*x. With Windows, email can be run automatically and remotely, without the need for a separate compilation step.

  11. The battle is for the hearts/minds of develop by pcause · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Early on, Microsoft understood that the platform battle is won by those that win the hearts and minds of developers. DOS was a *terrible* environment, but developers built some cool applicaitons and the platform became a huge success. You have to look at this announcement in conjunciton with the Unix Services for Windows announcement.

    VB and the VB tools captured a good chunk of corporate developers. I hate VB, but you coul design and build simple forms based applications that talk to a database pretty quickly and easily. Visual Studio provide an excellent intregrated IDE (no flames from Borland lovers) for many C++ developers. it simplified a lot of routine stuff, made finding funcitons easy, integrated the debugger and more. Lots of folks.

    IBM recognized that it needs developers for Java to succeed and the purchase of Rational was aimed at getting the corporate developer that is on VB and VC++.

    With this compiler and the USFW annoucement, you can now take the *nix stuff and port it pretty easily and for free to Windows. No more need to assemble tools, install Cygwin or the like. There used to be a barrier to getting *nix stuff to Windows. it is now gone. Microsoft will now have a platform, that is free, to allow free software developers to make their stuff available on Windows as native applications. And you cna then add Windows extensions if you want.

    The unreliguous among us will grab this and move *nix stuff we've been missing or haven't had access to.

  12. Optimizing beyond Win32... by aksansai · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Microsoft has spent over a decade essentially supporting only ONE processor architecture, x86. The GNU project has to worry about applying optimization to a plethora of architectures, including the quirks associated with each particular implementation.

    Not Microsoft - it gets to focus on how to produce the most amount of work out of a processor of at least 80486 grade instructions. How easy is that? They get to throw a hundred developers to extract every bit of performance possible out of one processor. Every now and then make a modification to support a new supplemental instruction set (MMX, 3dnow!, SSE, etc.)

    If you read their optimization whitepapers, you will notice that much of their optimization is done at the math level - nothing Win32 specific. Also, their memory optimization, loop unrolling, inlining, etc. is considered top notch by many software developers.

    --
    Ayup
  13. Yes please! Don't increase the cost for the rest! by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 5, Funny

    Fscking CDs are bloody expensive. Look at AOL, the IT magazines, heck, even newspapers that sell for a few cents. All of them are bleeeeding money given those CDs away for free.

    MS, with his zillions of money in the bank, can't affor to spend a few thousend making development tools available.

    No! Those communist ideas should be brought down and burned like the trojan horse they surely are.

    To give something for free! MS! Never!

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  14. Re:No lib.exe by ajp · · Score: 5, Informative

    Try using the link /lib switch. It offers the exact same functionality as lib.exe.

  15. Re:From the posted EULA by shiftless · · Score: 5, Informative

    1.1 General License Grant. Microsoft grants to you as an individual, a personal, nonexclusive license to make and use copies of the Software (i) for your internal use; (ii) for designing, developing, testing and demonstrating your software product(s); and (iii) for evaluation of the Software.

    As in, for demonstration only. If you're going to distribute binaries, don't compile them with this tool.


    Nope. That clause governs copying of the Software- in other words, the compiler. It says nothing about distribution of works you create using the Software.

  16. Re:No assembler? by billcopc · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I remember a certain 12 year old student who couldn't afford MASM and didn't like TASM so he wrote his own macro preprocessor in C. Then the code was fed back to Debug.com and BEHOLD it worked.

    Young programmers today don't realize how spoilt they are. Back in the day we all had our copy of the Intel386 assembler document, and a heavily modified version of Abrash's Zen Timer. Have you ever seem a man shuffle assembler instructions by hand to alleviate register contention, or deliberately NOT'ing AX and reversing the following branch to lull the Pentium into correctly predicting the jump, wasting one cycle but saving 4-7 (depending on whether the code following the branch accessed RAM or not, since the prefetch would have been invalidated).

    For that matter, do you even remember when we used fancy tricks to either cope with the 64kb code segment limit, or trounce all over it. I hate to say it, but I miss those days, because back then it took more than an optimizing compiler and a few www tutorials for someone to be called a programmer. You actually had to know at least a little bit what was going on under the hood. It wasn't about compilers and libraries and distributed object frameworks, it was about making a limited machine do limitless things.

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com