Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Comparing Linux C and C++ Compilers

Posted by michael on from the consumer-reports dept.

ChaoticCoyote writes "I've posted a comparison of recent GCC versions (3.3, 3.4, and the coming 4.0) with Intel C++ 8.1, including several benchmarks and "state-of-the-product" reviews. The new article replaces an older piece I published in late 2002. This new comparison marks what I hope will be an ongoing series that tracks the quality of Linux compilers."

1 of 379 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Not a lot of selection for Linux compilers, eh? by neurocutie · · Score: 0, Troll
    A troll I suppose...
    C'mon:
    1) You know, it seems there were far more compilers available for DOS and OS/2 than are available for Linux.
    2) To me, this says that Open Source removes software choices from the consumer in the long run,
    3) which means that open source is not a good thing for the general software-consuming public.

    how exactly do you get from 1) to 2) to 3) ? Geesh...

    Yes, there were a LOT of compiler choices under DOS (not so many under OS/2). But that says NOTHING about Open Source REMOVING choices. In order to remove something, it has to exist first. And the fact is that not very many folks have gone to the trouble to write noteworthy C compilers for Open Source, particularly since there already exists a pretty good one (GCC). But nothing has been "removed", actively or otherwise. And just how many C compiler choices are available for Win32 ? Also not very many: Watcom is dead, Borland is basically dead.

    And now how do you get from 2) to 3) ? Have a lot of choices within an environment isn't ALWAYS a good or desireable thing, and certainly not always natural. Particularly for certain core, foundation software, one doesn't necessarily want lots of choices. The compiler upon which most system software is built is certainly a candidate for this category. If Windows has 10 different system calls to open a file and Unix/Linux only has one, does that mean that Windows is better because there are more choices ?

    If part of what you are saying is that in a submarket where there is a lot of money, more produce choices will be offered and florish, sure... though not always (witness Win32 and compilers, or spreadsheets or presentation software). But once again you are confusing Open Source with Free software, and Free with "generates no revenue". The Open Source software business model has not fully matured YET... but the future looks promising to many of us observers.