473,748 Members | 2,167 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
+ Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

good c compiler

howdy!

please recommend a good c compiler.

- should be small
- should be fast
- should come with a good ide
- should be inexpensive

i am using windows os.

awaiting replies.
Sep 23 '08
159 7093
On Sep 24, 1:07*am, Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.in validwrote:
s0****@gmail.co m said:

<snip>
I see you still hold the absurd position that a non-fully-conforming
compiler "isn't a C compiler"...

I see you still hold the absurd position that C compilers are not obliged
to implement the C language correctly.
Where did I say that C compilers are not obliged to implement the C
language correctly?
I don't see how this view excludes,
say, the GFA BASIC compiler from being a C compiler. In fact, I don't see
how it excludes a garden fork or a cup of coffee from being a C compiler.
This excludes them: common sense. (Although you don't make very heavy
use of that.)

Sebastian

Sep 24 '08 #11
s0****@gmail.co m said:
On Sep 24, 1:07 am, Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.in validwrote:
>s0****@gmail.co m said:

<snip>
I see you still hold the absurd position that a non-fully-conforming
compiler "isn't a C compiler"...

I see you still hold the absurd position that C compilers are not
obliged to implement the C language correctly.

Where did I say that C compilers are not obliged to implement the C
language correctly?
If you agree that C compilers *are* obliged to implement the C language
correctly, you share my "absurd" position that a non-fully-conforming
compiler isn't a C compiler.
>I don't see how this view excludes,
say, the GFA BASIC compiler from being a C compiler. In fact, I don't
see how it excludes a garden fork or a cup of coffee from being a C
compiler.

This excludes them: common sense.
Yes, but common sense also excludes (from the set of all C compilers)
compilers that don't implement C, and yet until your most recent
disclaimer (quoted above - "Where did I say that C compilers are not
obliged...") it did seem that you wanted to include compilers that don't
implement C, which flies in the face of common sense.
(Although you don't make very heavy use of that.)
That may or may not be true, but you haven't demonstrated it to be true.

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk >
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sep 24 '08 #12
On Sep 24, 1:34*am, Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.in validwrote:
s0****@gmail.co m said:
On Sep 24, 1:07 am, Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.in validwrote:
s0****@gmail.co m said:
<snip>
I see you still hold the absurd position that a non-fully-conforming
compiler "isn't a C compiler"...
I see you still hold the absurd position that C compilers are not
obliged to implement the C language correctly.
Where did I say that C compilers are not obliged to implement the C
language correctly?

If you agree that C compilers *are* obliged to implement the C language
correctly, you share my "absurd" position that a non-fully-conforming
compiler isn't a C compiler.
No, because fully-conforming is not the same as correctly. Remember
that dereferencing an uninitialized pointer can cause a fully-
conforming implementation to execute the "rm -rf /" command. I don't
know about you, but I don't consider that "correctnes s". In any event,
there are still more important things in an implementation than full
conformance, such as actual usability, as I've mentioned before (e.g.,
powerful libraries, good optimization, innovative language extensions,
etc).
I don't see how this view excludes,
say, the GFA BASIC compiler from being a C compiler. In fact, I don't
see how it excludes a garden fork or a cup of coffee from being a C
compiler.
This excludes them: common sense.

Yes, but common sense also excludes (from the set of all C compilers)
compilers that don't implement C, and yet until your most recent
disclaimer (quoted above - "Where did I say that C compilers are not
obliged...") it did seem that you wanted to include compilers that don't
implement C, which flies in the face of common sense.
Terminology disagreements. Let's forget them.

Sebastian

Sep 24 '08 #13
s0****@gmail.co m said:
On Sep 24, 1:34 am, Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.in validwrote:
>s0****@gmail.co m said:
On Sep 24, 1:07 am, Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.in validwrote:
s0****@gmail.co m said:
><snip>
I see you still hold the absurd position that a
non-fully-conforming compiler "isn't a C compiler"...
>I see you still hold the absurd position that C compilers are not
obliged to implement the C language correctly.
Where did I say that C compilers are not obliged to implement the C
language correctly?

If you agree that C compilers *are* obliged to implement the C language
correctly, you share my "absurd" position that a non-fully-conforming
compiler isn't a C compiler.

No, because fully-conforming is not the same as correctly.
If an implementation does not translate C programs according to the C
language definition, how can it be considered a C implementation?

Remember
that dereferencing an uninitialized pointer can cause a fully-
conforming implementation to execute the "rm -rf /" command. I don't
know about you, but I don't consider that "correctnes s".
The incorrectness is in the program, not the implementation. But you merely
place an *additional* constraint on C implementations , the constraint of
"reasonableness ", the constraint of "not deliberately setting out to wreak
revenge on the hapless programmer" - and of course mainstream
implementations do observe this constraint. Nevertheless, programmers
would do well to stick to the rules of C if they wish their code to work.

In any event,
there are still more important things in an implementation than full
conformance,
I agree. Nevertheless, without conformance, it isn't a C implementation. It
might be a very important implementation indeed with lots of very
important features but, for it to be a C implementation, I do think it
needs to implement C.

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk >
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sep 24 '08 #14

"bernard" <no****@nospam. invalidwrote in message
news:68******** ********@aioe.o rg...
howdy!

please recommend a good c compiler.

- should be small
- should be fast
- should come with a good ide
- should be inexpensive

i am using windows os.
MinGW and Cygwin are good.
each has different merits, but I more prefer MinGW for technical reasons
(but Cygwin is better at being a "nicer" framework with a better set of
tools).

free IDE's are also available, but I don't personally use them.

awaiting replies.

Sep 24 '08 #15
s0****@gmail.co m wrote:
On Sep 24, 12:02 am, Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.in validwrote:
>bernard said:
>>howdy!
please recommend a good c compiler.
http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/portable/...#FreeCompilers

Is the 'lcc' compiler listed below the 'The Digital Mars C compiler'
the same as Jacob's lcc-win?

Sebastian
No. That is the original lcc, without the work I have done:

o C89: no long long, nor long double.
o No assembler, you have to use microsoft assembler
o no linker
o no debugger, nor the possibility of a debugger since it
doesn't generate debug information.
o No ide

--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32
Sep 24 '08 #16
Richard Heathfield wrote:
The lcc-win32 compiler /used/ to be on the list, but I took it off when I
realised that the maintainer wasn't particularly concerned about
conformance (a position that he has made abundantly clear on many
occasions by his impatience towards reports of conformance errors in his
compiler).

This is a lie by somebody that has made abundantly clear that
he hates my compiler. I have worked years implementing C99, and I have
now an implementation that is not missing any important feature.

--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32
Sep 24 '08 #17

"Richard Heathfield" <rj*@see.sig.in validwrote in message
news:1M******** *************** *******@bt.com. ..
s0****@gmail.co m said:

<snip>
>>
I see you still hold the absurd position that a non-fully-conforming
compiler "isn't a C compiler"...

I see you still hold the absurd position that C compilers are not obliged
to implement the C language correctly. I don't see how this view excludes,
say, the GFA BASIC compiler from being a C compiler. In fact, I don't see
how it excludes a garden fork or a cup of coffee from being a C compiler.
forall A (A or not A)

not a very useful way to think IMO.
if something accepts and compiles C (for the vast majority of inputs), even
if imperfectly in some edge cases, and offers a few extensions, it can still
be classified as a C compiler IMO.

the other things listed, however, will not compile any valid C programs...

it is much the same as if someone goes and declares that someone goes to
hell if they have ever become aroused, and that arousal is of an analogous
level of guilt to adultery (even if the person in question is not married,
the logic can be followed out this way).

this position is absurd (and yes, some people go in this direction in terms
of their doctrine).

so, please refrain from this style of thinking, it is silly...

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk >
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999

Sep 24 '08 #18
jacob navia said:
Richard Heathfield wrote:
>The lcc-win32 compiler /used/ to be on the list, but I took it off when
I realised that the maintainer wasn't particularly concerned about
conformance (a position that he has made abundantly clear on many
occasions by his impatience towards reports of conformance errors in his
compiler).


This is a lie by somebody that has made abundantly clear that
he hates my compiler.
You are mistaken on both counts. It's not a lie (you don't appear to know
what the word means), and I don't hate your compiler. I've never even used
your compiler, so how could I hate it?

Now, you clearly disagree with my claim that you aren't particularly
concerned with conformance. But if you *are* concerned about the
conformance issues in your implementation, why haven't you fixed them?
I have worked years implementing C99,
Does it conform yet?
and I have
now an implementation that is not missing any important feature.
Conformance is an important feature.

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk >
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sep 24 '08 #19
cr88192 said:
>
"Richard Heathfield" <rj*@see.sig.in validwrote in message
news:1M******** *************** *******@bt.com. ..
>s0****@gmail.co m said:

<snip>
>>>
I see you still hold the absurd position that a non-fully-conforming
compiler "isn't a C compiler"...

I see you still hold the absurd position that C compilers are not
obliged to implement the C language correctly. I don't see how this view
excludes, say, the GFA BASIC compiler from being a C compiler. In fact,
I don't see how it excludes a garden fork or a cup of coffee from being
a C compiler.

forall A (A or not A)

not a very useful way to think IMO.
Nor is it an accurate reflection of my point.
if something accepts and compiles C (for the vast majority of inputs),
even if imperfectly in some edge cases, and offers a few extensions, it
can still be classified as a C compiler IMO.
Extensions are neither here nor there, since any conforming implementation
is allowed to provide them as long as it doesn't break anything. I'm
tempted to agree about the "imperfectl y in some edge cases" provided the
implementation is being actively maintained and that reports of
non-conformance are swiftly acted upon. (This is purely in recognition of
the "last bug" problem - the implementor never quite knows whether his
implementation behaves exactly as planned, because you can't test
infinitely many cases.)
so, please refrain from this style of thinking, it is silly...
The absurd examples I gave were a consequence of his style of thinking, not
mine.

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk >
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sep 24 '08 #20

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

Similar topics

30
3467
by: Christian Seberino | last post by:
How does Ruby compare to Python?? How good is DESIGN of Ruby compared to Python? Python's design is godly. I'm wondering if Ruby's is godly too. I've heard it has solid OOP design but then I've also heard there are lots of weird ways to do some things kinda like Perl which is bad for me. Any other ideas?
1
13277
by: lovens weche | last post by:
Is there a good editor that can be used with a 32 bit compiler under the MS-Dos platform? I used to use the Watcom C++ 11 compiler but the editor that came with it (VI if I remeber) was not that great, in fact it was horrible. I'm searching for a Borland C++ style editor and a good C++ 32 bit compiler. Doesn't really matter if the compiler doesn't optimize the code. Thanx in advance... Lovens
7
6169
by: Kyle Stevens | last post by:
Does anyone know of and good, and free, C++ compiler programs and where I might download them?
3
1952
by: happy | last post by:
I am searching over the net for a Good C compiler that has good editor .. Tc 2.01 has bad editor . please advice me with aweb site for downloading the godd Editor C compiler NOT C++. Thanks
9
3032
by: myhotline | last post by:
Hi all, After googling i came across Pelles C, is it a good C compiler over Windows( I am using Windows Xp )...Though Pelles C website says its a C99-compliant compiler, even though i would like somebody to tell me abnout this C99-COmpliance? Are there any other good C99-compliant comilers available for windows....please do let me know.... Any cooperation at earliest will be highly appreciated... REgards -Ahmed
43
2659
by: Sensei | last post by:
Hi! I'm thinking about a good programming style, pros and cons of some topics. Of course, this has nothing to do with indentation... Students are now java-dependent (too bad) and I need some serious motivations for many issues... I hope you can help me :) I begin with the two major for now, others will come for sure! - function variables: they're used to java, so no pointers. Personally I'd use always pointers, but why could be better...
87
3801
by: H. | last post by:
I am a student taking a machine structures class in a university, which includes learning C. I am looking for a good freeware or shareware compiler which can be used in a "C only" mode. C++ isn't allowed in assignments, and I would like the compiler to check for C syntax instead of C++ syntax. Besides that, ease of use for a beginner and basic debugging capabilities are important. Suggestions are welcome.
244
9561
by: Ajinkya | last post by:
Can anyone suggest me a good compiler for(c/cpp) for windows? I tried dev cpp but its debugging facility is very poor.
23
3144
by: tonytech08 | last post by:
What I like about the C++ object model: that the data portion of the class IS the object (dereferencing an object gets you the data of a POD object). What I don't like about the C++ object model: that most OO features are not available for class object design without loss of POD-ness. So, I'm more than leaning toward "bad" because of the limitations and
0
8982
marktang
by: marktang | last post by:
ONU (Optical Network Unit) is one of the key components for providing high-speed Internet services. Its primary function is to act as an endpoint device located at the user's premises. However, people are often confused as to whether an ONU can Work As a Router. In this blog post, we’ll explore What is ONU, What Is Router, ONU & Router’s main usage, and What is the difference between ONU and Router. Let’s take a closer look ! Part I. Meaning of...
0
9528
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. Here is my compilation command: g++-12 -std=c++20 -Wnarrowing bit_field.cpp Here is the code in...
0
9357
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 captivates audiences and drives business growth. The Art of Business Website Design Your website is...
1
9309
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 most users, this new feature is actually very convenient. If you want to control the update process,...
0
8235
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 launch it, all on its own.... Now, this would greatly impact the work of software developers. The idea...
0
6072
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 into image. Globals.ThisAddIn.Application.ActiveDocument.Select();...
0
4591
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 the same network. But I'm wondering if it's possible to do the same thing, with 2 Pfsense firewalls...
0
4863
by: adsilva | last post by:
A Windows Forms form does not have the event Unload, like VB6. What one acts like?
2
2774
muto222
by: muto222 | last post by:
How can i add a mobile payment intergratation into php mysql website.

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.