473,545 Members | 2,012 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
+ Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Visual C++ Express Edition or lcc-win32?

Apologies if my cross posting has offended anyone....

For a pure hobbyist C/C++ programmer, who wants to develop
applications to run on Windows, what would be a better choice to
install: Visual C++ Express 2005 Edition or lcc-win32? Does anyone
have any opinion to share?

Also, is there a C++ compiler akin to lcc-win32?

Thanks,
Nimmi

Sep 2 '07
166 7754
Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.in validwrites:
>
If ever it does happen, I'll be delighted for Mr Navia. But, alas, I'm
not holding my breath.
Please do. For a long, long time.

"alas".

You are the definition of Narcissus.
Sep 3 '07 #31
[followup set to comp.lang.c]
On Sun, 02 Sep 2007 13:14:46 +0200, jacob navia wrote:
Army1987 wrote:
[snip]
>If you don't need C99 support and can wait for 90MB to download,
use MSVC. Its long double is eight bytes, but at least the fractal
picture I generate computing with them isn't yellowed by a bug
which prevents a three byte struct from being returned correctly.

??? This was fixed at least a year ago. Can you send a test
example?
http://groups.google.it/group/comp.l...2f1a7d476c7c65
>Also it doesn't have the upper limits of some unsigned types
suffixed with LL without any U.

Either it is a fixed bug since ages or you are talking nonsense.

In limits.h I have
#define ULLONG_MAX 184467440737095 51615ULL
And in stdint.h you have (except for the comments):
#ifndef __stdint_h__
#define __stdint_h__

[snip]

#define INTMAX_C(a) (a##LL)
#define UINTMAX_C(a) (a##LL)
/* What? */

typedef char int_fast8_t;
typedef unsigned char uint_fast8_t;
typedef short int_fast16_t;
/* well, is int_fast16_t smaller than int? The standard suggests
* that int has the "natural" size, so is something unnatural
* faster? Also, on glibc with this same processor int_fast16_t
* is int, does the relative speed of types depend on the OS, on
* the compiler, or what? */
typedef unsigned short uint_fast16_t;
typedef int int_fast32_t;
typedef unsigned int uint_fast32_t;
typedef long long int_fast64_t;
typedef unsigned long long uint_fast64_t;

[snip]

#define INT8_MIN -128
#define INT16_MIN -32768
#define INT32_MIN -2147483648
/* 2147483648 doesn't fit in a int32_t, so its type can't be
* int32_t, and neither the type of its negation can. */
#define INT64_MIN -922337203685477 5808LL
/* 922337203685477 5808 doesn't fit in any signed type... */

[snip]

#define RSIZE_MAX INT32_MAX
/* Well, where on Earth does the C standard grant you the right to
* invade the user namespace like that? */
#endif

Well, I remembered the other way round... Except for the case of
the UINTMAX_C macro...
>
And I didn't get any assertion
failure from its compiler yet.

Can you provide an example?

Obviously a typo invalidates all other features of this compiler.

Using MSVC of course prevents you from all bugs since it is
a well known thing that Microsoft has never any bugs.
If the OP wants to be "prevented from all bugs" he'd not be using
Windows in the first place (or even not a computer in the first
place...) :-)
--
Army1987 (Replace "NOSPAM" with "email")
No-one ever won a game by resigning. -- S. Tartakower

Sep 3 '07 #32
Army1987 wrote:
[followup set to comp.lang.c]
On Sun, 02 Sep 2007 13:14:46 +0200, jacob navia wrote:
>Army1987 wrote:
[snip]
>>If you don't need C99 support and can wait for 90MB to download,
use MSVC. Its long double is eight bytes, but at least the fractal
picture I generate computing with them isn't yellowed by a bug
which prevents a three byte struct from being returned correctly.
??? This was fixed at least a year ago. Can you send a test
example?
http://groups.google.it/group/comp.l...2f1a7d476c7c65
This is a discussion where people talk about functions returning
structures. No bugs report in there.
>>Also it doesn't have the upper limits of some unsigned types
suffixed with LL without any U.
Either it is a fixed bug since ages or you are talking nonsense.

In limits.h I have
#define ULLONG_MAX 184467440737095 51615ULL

And in stdint.h you have (except for the comments):
#ifndef __stdint_h__

#define __stdint_h__

[snip]

#define INTMAX_C(a) (a##LL)

#define UINTMAX_C(a) (a##LL)
fixed.
>
typedef short int_fast16_t;

/* well, is int_fast16_t smaller than int? The standard suggests

* that int has the "natural" size, so is something unnatural

* faster?
Loading a short should be faster than loading an integer
since it makes less i/o.
Also, on glibc with this same processor int_fast16_t

* is int, does the relative speed of types depend on the OS, on
* the compiler, or what? */
See above
#define INT32_MIN -2147483648

/* 2147483648 doesn't fit in a int32_t, so its type can't be

* int32_t, and neither the type of its negation can. */
Well apparently it can. Just do a printf of INT32_MIN with
lcc-win32.
#include <stdint.h>
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
printf("INT32_M IN=%d\n",INT32_ MIN);
}

prints the correct value.
#define INT64_MIN -922337203685477 5808LL

/* 922337203685477 5808 doesn't fit in any signed type... */

#include <stdint.h>
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
printf("INT32_M IN=%lld\n",INT3 2_MIN);
}

prints the correct value...
>
[snip]

#define RSIZE_MAX INT32_MAX

/* Well, where on Earth does the C standard grant you the right to

* invade the user namespace like that? */
RSIZE_MAX is defined in the Technical Report proposed to the standards
comitee by Microsoft.
Lcc-win32 uses RSIZE_MAX
>
#endif

[snip rants]
Sep 3 '07 #33
In article <46************ *************** ***@comcast.com >, Victor
Bazarov <v.********@com Acast.netwrites
>Nimmi Srivastav wrote:
>Apologies if my cross posting has offended anyone....

For a pure hobbyist C/C++ programmer, who wants to develop
applications to run on Windows, what would be a better choice to
install: Visual C++ Express 2005 Edition or lcc-win32? Does anyone
have any opinion to share?

I've used MS compilers (with various success) from around 1990, and
eventually (unfortunately, only recently) they got quite decent. I
cannot vouch for their C[99] support, but their C++ compliance is
very good.
ISO Compliance is not relevant. The OP is looking for an easy
(inexpensive) way of creating applications for MS Windows. A compiler
that is MS compliant is what is required.

Which is why people use GCC on Linux. Because both use the same flavour
of C.

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
/\/\/ ch***@phaedsys. org www.phaedsys.org \/\/\
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

Sep 3 '07 #34
In article <11************ **********@d55g 2000hsg.googleg roups.com>,
Nimmi Srivastav <ni************ *@yahoo.comwrit es
>Apologies if my cross posting has offended anyone....

For a pure hobbyist C/C++ programmer, who wants to develop
applications to run on Windows, what would be a better choice to
install: Visual C++ Express 2005 Edition or lcc-win32? Does anyone
have any opinion to share?
No contest. Visual C++ Express 2005.
Why?
Not because I like Microsoft
Not because it is the best compiler.

Simply because it will come with a smooth integration into windows, all
the libraries and example projects and lots of help.

In short it is VERY easy for a novice to set up and use with minimum
fuss.

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
/\/\/ ch***@phaedsys. org www.phaedsys.org \/\/\
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

Sep 3 '07 #35
Army1987 <ar******@NOSPA M.itwrites:
[...]
And in stdint.h you have (except for the comments):
#ifndef __stdint_h__
#define __stdint_h__
[SNIP]
#define INT8_MIN -128
#define INT16_MIN -32768
#define INT32_MIN -2147483648
[SNIP]

You didn't enclose these in parentheses? C99 7.1.2 says:

Any definition of an object-like macro described in this clause
shall expand to code that is fully protected by parentheses where
necessary, so that it groups in an arbitrary expression as if it
were a single identifier.

I haven't been able to construct an expression that would be evaluated
differently with or without parentheses in your macro definitions, but
unless you've proven that there isn't one, I'd recommend changing the
definitions. (I always fully parenthesize an object-like macro
definition unless it's already a primary expression.)

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keit h) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <* <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
Sep 3 '07 #36
jacob navia <ja***@jacob.re mcomp.frwrites:
Army1987 wrote:
[...]
>typedef short int_fast16_t;
/* well, is int_fast16_t smaller than int? The standard suggests
* that int has the "natural" size, so is something unnatural
* faster?

Loading a short should be faster than loading an integer
since it makes less i/o.
What i/o? Or are you using the term in some odd sense?

You say it *should* be faster; have you measured it?

[...]
>#define INT32_MIN -2147483648
/* 2147483648 doesn't fit in a int32_t, so its type can't be
* int32_t, and neither the type of its negation can. */

Well apparently it can. Just do a printf of INT32_MIN with
lcc-win32.
#include <stdint.h>
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
printf("INT32_M IN=%d\n",INT32_ MIN);
}

prints the correct value.
That doesn't necessarily prove anything.

Try this:

#include <stdint.h>
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
printf("sizeof INT32_MIN = %d\n", (int)sizeof INT32_MIN);
return 0;
}

[...]
>#define RSIZE_MAX INT32_MAX
/* Well, where on Earth does the C standard grant you the right to
* invade the user namespace like that? */

RSIZE_MAX is defined in the Technical Report proposed to the standards
comitee by Microsoft.
Lcc-win32 uses RSIZE_MAX
Do you provide a way to suppress this declaration?

RSIZE_MAX is not part of standard C. I should be able to use it as an
identifier in my own conforming C program.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keit h) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <* <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
Sep 3 '07 #37
Chris Hills <ch***@phaedsys .orgwrites:
[...]
Gcc is not ISO C99 compliant either. (And I think less so than the
MS compilers these days.)
Really? My impression, based entirely on what I've read here, is that
MS has expressed no interest in supporting C99. Do you have better
information?

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keit h) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <* <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
Sep 3 '07 #38
Keith Thompson wrote:
jacob navia <ja***@jacob.re mcomp.frwrites:
>Army1987 wrote:
[...]
>>typedef short int_fast16_t;
/* well, is int_fast16_t smaller than int? The standard suggests
* that int has the "natural" size, so is something unnatural
* faster?
Loading a short should be faster than loading an integer
since it makes less i/o.

What i/o? Or are you using the term in some odd sense?

You say it *should* be faster; have you measured it?

[...]
>>#define INT32_MIN -2147483648
/* 2147483648 doesn't fit in a int32_t, so its type can't be
* int32_t, and neither the type of its negation can. */
Well apparently it can. Just do a printf of INT32_MIN with
lcc-win32.
#include <stdint.h>
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
printf("INT32_M IN=%d\n",INT32_ MIN);
}

prints the correct value.

That doesn't necessarily prove anything.

Try this:

#include <stdint.h>
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
printf("sizeof INT32_MIN = %d\n", (int)sizeof INT32_MIN);
return 0;
}
That prints 4.

sizeof(int) == 4 in lcc-win32.

Look. What happens is this:
When the compiler sees that constant, it is converted to long long,
then it is truncated.

This is perfectly legal, and my headers do not have
to be portable to other compilers.

OK?
>
[...]
>>#define RSIZE_MAX INT32_MAX
/* Well, where on Earth does the C standard grant you the right to
* invade the user namespace like that? */
RSIZE_MAX is defined in the Technical Report proposed to the standards
comitee by Microsoft.
Lcc-win32 uses RSIZE_MAX

Do you provide a way to suppress this declaration?

RSIZE_MAX is not part of standard C. I should be able to use it as an
identifier in my own conforming C program.
OK, will had a flag for -ansic.
Sep 3 '07 #39
Keith Thompson wrote:
Army1987 <ar******@NOSPA M.itwrites:
[...]
>And in stdint.h you have (except for the comments):
#ifndef __stdint_h__
#define __stdint_h__
[SNIP]
>#define INT8_MIN -128
#define INT16_MIN -32768
#define INT32_MIN -2147483648
[SNIP]

You didn't enclose these in parentheses? C99 7.1.2 says:

Any definition of an object-like macro described in this clause
shall expand to code that is fully protected by parentheses where
necessary, so that it groups in an arbitrary expression as if it
were a single identifier.
Where necessary.
I haven't been able to construct an expression that would be evaluated
differently with or without parentheses in your macro definitions,

You see?

It is not necessary...

but
unless you've proven that there isn't one, I'd recommend changing the
definitions. (I always fully parenthesize an object-like macro
definition unless it's already a primary expression.)
Proof.

Suppose there is a construct where -1 needs a parentheses.

In that case (-1) "..." != -1 "..."

This means that the expression "..." must have a binary operator
that binds more than unary minus to the constant 1.

Unary minus has precedence 15.

But ALL operators at level 15 are UNARY operators. There are
NO binary operators at level 15.

Remains level 16, with . (point) function call ,
increment decrement, and indexing.

All those operations can't use a manifest constant like 1
or 447766.

Q.E.D

Reference: Harbison and Steele. "C, a reference manual"
See the table of precedences.
Sep 3 '07 #40

This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion.

Similar topics

3
1863
by: clintonG | last post by:
Visual C# 2005 Express Edition is a simple, lightweight, integrated development environment designed for beginning programmers and non-professional developers interested in building Windows Forms, class libraries, and console-based applications. Visual C# 2005 Express Edition includes many of the same productivity features found in Visual...
0
1269
by: Maury | last post by:
I just downloaded .Net Framework Beta2 and Visual Web Developer Express Edition Beta and Visual C# Express Edition. I installed .Net Framework Beta2, then I installed Visual Web Developer Express Edition Beta but the installation failed because the installation package can't find the Beta 2 (?). So I tried to install Visual C# Express...
1
7136
by: QLD_AU | last post by:
Has anyone see the following error ? VS 2005 Installs ok, however the SQL Mobile Edition (part of a full install) fails with the following error ? With Thanks Jason
4
2515
by: Andrew Robinson | last post by:
My main dev machine has WinXp and VS2005 (pro). 1. I need to install VWD Express Edition so that I can do some instruction on this. Any issues with both on the same machine. Installation order? 2. Does VWD Express Edition support the idea of Solutions? I coun't figure out how to create a blank solution which I usually do with VS2005...
2
3412
by: Progman | last post by:
I have Visual Studio 2005 Standard edition. Is ti the same thing as the Express edition or Standard is more?
6
1612
by: Simon Brown | last post by:
Hi, I am considering buying Visual Studio Standard Edition and have these questions about the VC++ incuded. Could you also, to help me know the diffrene in capablility, answer the same questions about the express edition. Here they are: >1) -Can you access the Windows API? >2) -Can you use Direct-X? >3) -Can you use Opengl?
1
1639
by: Ruth | last post by:
Which edition of Visual Studio do I have? "About" says that I have Visual Studio 8.0.5.0727.42: is this the professional, express, or enterprise edition? I do not believe it is the Team edition. I am trying to use "Attach to Your Form for Debugging" to attach to a process and the "Attach" button is grayed out. Help says that the "Attach...
1
1410
by: Ruth | last post by:
Which edition of Visual Studio do I have? "About" says that I have Visual Studio 8.0.5.0727.42: is this the professional, express, or enterprise edition? I do not believe it is the Team edition. I am trying to use "Attach to Your Form for Debugging" to attach to a process and the "Attach" button is grayed out. Help says that the "Attach...
1
2494
by: Dr T | last post by:
Hi! I downloaded MS Visual Web Developer 2005 Express Edition, MS .NET Framework SDK v2.0, and MS SQL Server 2005. Subsequently, I bought MS Visual Studio 2005 Professional Edition. 1) Are both the MS Visual Web Developer 2005 Express Edition and the MS Visual Studio 2005 Professional Edition used to develop .ASP applications?
24
2440
by: JJ | last post by:
I see the new software is 'RTM' but what does that mean in terms of when we can actually purchase it? Thanks, JJ
0
7406
by: Hystou | last post by:
Most computers default to English, but sometimes we require a different language, especially when relocating. Forgot to request a specific language before your computer shipped? No problem! You can effortlessly switch the default language on Windows 10 without reinstalling. I'll walk you through it. First, let's disable language...
0
7660
Oralloy
by: Oralloy | last post by:
Hello folks, I am unable to find appropriate documentation on the type promotion of bit-fields when using the generalised comparison operator "<=>". The problem is that using the GNU compilers, it seems that the internal comparison operator "<=>" tries to promote arguments from unsigned to signed. This is as boiled down as I can make it. ...
0
7813
jinu1996
by: jinu1996 | last post by:
In today's digital age, having a compelling online presence is paramount for businesses aiming to thrive in a competitive landscape. At the heart of this digital strategy lies an intricately woven tapestry of website design and digital marketing. It's not merely about having a website; it's about crafting an immersive digital experience that...
1
7431
by: Hystou | last post by:
Overview: Windows 11 and 10 have less user interface control over operating system update behaviour than previous versions of Windows. In Windows 11 and 10, there is no way to turn off the Windows Update option using the Control Panel or Settings app; it automatically checks for updates and installs any it finds, whether you like it or not. For...
0
7761
tracyyun
by: tracyyun | last post by:
Dear forum friends, With the development of smart home technology, a variety of wireless communication protocols have appeared on the market, such as Zigbee, Z-Wave, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, etc. Each protocol has its own unique characteristics and advantages, but as a user who is planning to build a smart home system, I am a bit confused by the...
0
5976
agi2029
by: agi2029 | last post by:
Let's talk about the concept of autonomous AI software engineers and no-code agents. These AIs are designed to manage the entire lifecycle of a software development project—planning, coding, testing, and deployment—without human intervention. Imagine an AI that can take a project description, break it down, write the code, debug it, and then...
1
5337
isladogs
by: isladogs | last post by:
The next Access Europe User Group meeting will be on Wednesday 1 May 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC+1) and finishing by 19:30 (7.30PM). In this session, we are pleased to welcome a new presenter, Adolph Dupré who will be discussing some powerful techniques for using class modules. He will explain when you may want to use classes...
0
4949
by: conductexam | last post by:
I have .net C# application in which I am extracting data from word file and save it in database particularly. To store word all data as it is I am converting the whole word file firstly in HTML and then checking html paragraph one by one. At the time of converting from word file to html my equations which are in the word document file was convert...
0
3457
by: TSSRALBI | last post by:
Hello I'm a network technician in training and I need your help. I am currently learning how to create and manage the different types of VPNs and I have a question about LAN-to-LAN VPNs. The last exercise I practiced was to create a LAN-to-LAN VPN between two Pfsense firewalls, by using IPSEC protocols. I succeeded, with both firewalls in...

By using Bytes.com and it's services, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

To disable or enable advertisements and analytics tracking please visit the manage ads & tracking page.