Compiler for Windows (Open Source)

[Hugh Cowan]

Hello,

I am looking at getting a simple compiler for Windows that I can use
to play around with different Open Source software.

I am not a full-time programmer (anymore), nor do I plan to write
software either. I just want to play around and look at some of the
Open Source software that is out there for Windows.

Most of the applications are written in C, or C++ and therefore I
really just need a simple, decent compiler so that I can play around
with them.

I would prefer not to work with just a Command Line compiler as I
won't be using it everyday, and therefore won't remember all those
switches.

Some of the ones out there that I have seen are:

1. Borland Free C++ compiler (Command Line Only)
2. LCC-Win32
3. Eclipse -- CDT (C Developer Tools)
4. GCC
5. MingGW
6. CygWin

Anyone got any suggestions on which one (or anyone that I didn't
mention) would be good to use?

Thanks so much.

Hugh,

[Nils O. Selåsdal]

On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 11:22:49 -0700, Hugh Cowan wrote:

Hello,

I am looking at getting a simple compiler for Windows that I can use
to play around with different Open Source software.

I am not a full-time programmer (anymore), nor do I plan to write
software either. I just want to play around and look at some of the
Open Source software that is out there for Windows.

Most of the applications are written in C, or C++ and therefore I
really just need a simple, decent compiler so that I can play around
with them.

I would prefer not to work with just a Command Line compiler as I
won't be using it everyday, and therefore won't remember all those
switches.

Go with dev-cpp or eclipse then, note that you still need gcc/mingw
installed.

[Erik de Castro Lopo]

Hugh Cowan wrote:

Hello,

I am looking at getting a simple compiler for Windows that I can use
to play around with different Open Source software.

I am not a full-time programmer (anymore), nor do I plan to write
software either. I just want to play around and look at some of the
Open Source software that is out there for Windows.

Most of the applications are written in C, or C++ and therefore I
really just need a simple, decent compiler so that I can play around
with them.

I would prefer not to work with just a Command Line compiler as I
won't be using it everyday, and therefore won't remember all those
switches.

Some of the ones out there that I have seen are:

1. Borland Free C++ compiler (Command Line Only)
2. LCC-Win32
3. Eclipse -- CDT (C Developer Tools)
I have not bothered with those.
4. GCC
5. MingGW
6. CygWin

These three all use the same compiler (GNU gcc).

I use both MinGW and Cygwin and they both work very well.

Erik
--
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
Erik de Castro Lopo no****@mega-nerd.com (Yes it's valid)
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
Fundamentalist : Someone who is colour blind and yet wants everyone
else to see the world with the same lack of colour.

[Chris Barts]

On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 11:22:49 -0700, Hugh Cowan wrote:

1. Borland Free C++ compiler (Command Line Only)
2. LCC-Win32
3. Eclipse -- CDT (C Developer Tools)
Never used any of these, and I don't think they're open source.
4. GCC
This is the only compiler in this half of the list. I like it, myself,
because it supports all of C89, a workable subset of C99, and compilers
for other languages (such as C++, Objective-C, Ada 95, Fortran, and Pascal).
5. MingGW
MinGW (Minimal GNU environment for Windows) is a collection of headers and
libraries that allow you to develop native Windows applications using the
GNU software development tools (gcc, as, ld, and so on). It's a good
complement to gcc on Windows systems.
6. CygWin

This is a way for Unix geeks to get something resembling a usable
environment on Windows computers. To be more specific, it's a collection
of GNU software (including the bash shell and a load of other userland
software) that will work (with some OS-imposed limitations) on Windows
machines. You may or may not want this, depending on how much you actually
like the Unix command line interface. It makes no difference to gcc or
MinGW.

[Richard Bos]

hw*****@hotmail.com (Hugh Cowan) wrote:

Most of the applications are written in C, or C++ and therefore I
really just need a simple, decent compiler so that I can play around
with them. 2. LCC-Win32
If the comments of this one's maintainer in c.l.c are anything to judge
by, this is not worth the electrons used to store it.
4. GCC
5. MingGW
6. CygWin

I use Bloodshed's Dev-C++, which is an IDE using MingW, which is GCC. It
can also be used with CygWin. You won't need to download any of those
separately, btw; the main Dev-C++ package comes complete with the
compiler. <http://www.bloodshed.net/devcpp.html>.

Richard

[jacob navia]

Hugh Cowan wrote:

Hello,

I am looking at getting a simple compiler for Windows that I can use
to play around with different Open Source software.

I am not a full-time programmer (anymore), nor do I plan to write
software either. I just want to play around and look at some of the
Open Source software that is out there for Windows.

Most of the applications are written in C, or C++ and therefore I
really just need a simple, decent compiler so that I can play around
with them.

I would prefer not to work with just a Command Line compiler as I
won't be using it everyday, and therefore won't remember all those
switches.

Some of the ones out there that I have seen are:

1. Borland Free C++ compiler (Command Line Only)
2. LCC-Win32

I am the author of the lcc-win32 system, so my viewpoint is biased.

lcc-win32 offers you a windowed debugger, a resource editor, what
many of the other free tools do not offer.
A resource editor allows you to graphically design dialog boxes
and windows.

It is a C compiler with some extensions (operator overloading, generic
functions and others)

The IDE of lcc-win32 has a lot of features that you will only find
in much more expensive software: Spelling correction (mistyped words are
underlined in red), goto definition, software metrics, function list,
globals usage/function, object code cross referencing, grep/diff,
project management with automatic makefile generation and dependencies
analysis, and many other features.

lcc-win32 is not open source, it is just free for you to use. You can
download the binaries at

http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32.

Note that the size of the whole system is very small. The whole download
is only 4MB. There is a lot of documentation, and a tutorial that
teaches you how to use the system and the C language from the ground up.

jacob

[Dan Pop]

In <41***********************@news.wanadoo.fr> jacob navia <ja***@jacob.remcomp.fr> writes:

Hugh Cowan wrote:

Some of the ones out there that I have seen are:

1. Borland Free C++ compiler (Command Line Only)
2. LCC-Win32
I am the author of the lcc-win32 system, so my viewpoint is biased.

So biased that you're actually lying when talking about lcc-win32.
It is a C compiler with some extensions (operator overloading, generic
functions and others)

It is NOT a C compiler, because it doesn't conform to any commonly
accepted C specification (K&R, C89, C99). You have no right to call it
a C compiler until you get it to conform to at least one of the
specifications mentioned above. Your -ansic option simply does not work
as advertised.

The OP also mentions Open Source, BTW.

Dan
--
Dan Pop
DESY Zeuthen, RZ group
Email: Da*****@ifh.de
Currently looking for a job in the European Union

[Hugh Cowan]

Chris Barts <ch*****@gmail.com> wrote in message news:<pa****************************@gmail.com>...

On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 11:22:49 -0700, Hugh Cowan wrote:

1. Borland Free C++ compiler (Command Line Only)
2. LCC-Win32
3. Eclipse -- CDT (C Developer Tools)

Never used any of these, and I don't think they're open source.

4. GCC

This is the only compiler in this half of the list. I like it, myself,
because it supports all of C89, a workable subset of C99, and compilers
for other languages (such as C++, Objective-C, Ada 95, Fortran, and Pascal).

5. MingGW

MinGW (Minimal GNU environment for Windows) is a collection of headers and
libraries that allow you to develop native Windows applications using the
GNU software development tools (gcc, as, ld, and so on). It's a good
complement to gcc on Windows systems.

6. CygWin

This is a way for Unix geeks to get something resembling a usable
environment on Windows computers. To be more specific, it's a collection
of GNU software (including the bash shell and a load of other userland
software) that will work (with some OS-imposed limitations) on Windows
machines. You may or may not want this, depending on how much you actually
like the Unix command line interface. It makes no difference to gcc or
MinGW.

Thanks Chris for the reply and information. Especially for CygWin --
I thought that you needed that for the GCC compiler, and wasn't sure
what the difference was between that and MinGW. You have cleared up a
number of things for me.

Thanks again,

Hugh

[Hugh Cowan]

rl*@hoekstra-uitgeverij.nl (Richard Bos) wrote in message news:<41****************@news.individual.net>...

hw*****@hotmail.com (Hugh Cowan) wrote:

Most of the applications are written in C, or C++ and therefore I
really just need a simple, decent compiler so that I can play around
with them.

2. LCC-Win32

If the comments of this one's maintainer in c.l.c are anything to judge
by, this is not worth the electrons used to store it.

4. GCC
5. MingGW
6. CygWin

I use Bloodshed's Dev-C++, which is an IDE using MingW, which is GCC. It
can also be used with CygWin. You won't need to download any of those
separately, btw; the main Dev-C++ package comes complete with the
compiler. <http://www.bloodshed.net/devcpp.html>.

Richard

Thanks for mentioning about Bloodshed's Dev-C++ -- I think that I will
probably try that one. It's good to know that it includes everything
so I don't need to go searching around for the individual components
in order to get the thing working.

One single download sure makes things a lot easier.

Thanks again,

Hugh

[CBFalconer]

Hugh Cowan wrote:

Chris Barts <ch*****@gmail.com> wrote in message

On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 11:22:49 -0700, Hugh Cowan wrote:

1. Borland Free C++ compiler (Command Line Only)
2. LCC-Win32
3. Eclipse -- CDT (C Developer Tools)

Never used any of these, and I don't think they're open source.

4. GCC

This is the only compiler in this half of the list. I like it,
myself, because it supports all of C89, a workable subset of C99,
and compilers for other languages (such as C++, Objective-C, Ada
95, Fortran, and Pascal).

5. MingGW

MinGW (Minimal GNU environment for Windows) is a collection of
headers and libraries that allow you to develop native Windows
applications using the GNU software development tools (gcc, as,
ld, and so on). It's a good complement to gcc on Windows systems.

6. CygWin

This is a way for Unix geeks to get something resembling a
usable environment on Windows computers. To be more specific,
it's a collection of GNU software (including the bash shell and
a load of other userland software) that will work (with some
OS-imposed limitations) on Windows machines. You may or may not
want this, depending on how much you actually like the Unix
command line interface. It makes no difference to gcc or MinGW.

Thanks Chris for the reply and information. Especially for
CygWin -- I thought that you needed that for the GCC compiler,
and wasn't sure what the difference was between that and MinGW.
You have cleared up a number of things for me.

You are all omitting:

7. DJGPP

Which is much like MingW or CygWin, except that the underlying OS
is MsDos (or the simulation of MsDos available on Windoze). Again,
the base compiler is gcc. There are some limitations, but again
the overall effect is much like having a Unix/Linux available. Most
of GNU has been ported to it. The system will run on non-Microsoft
systems, such as FreeDos or DRDos, but does require a '386 or
better to function.

I have the following packages installed at the present, some of
which (eg txt, fil, dif, bnu) contain multiple utilities:

bc106b.mft bnu215b.mft bsh204b.mft bsn135b.mft
cdecl25b.mft cdecl25s.mft csc154b.mft CSDPMI5B.MFT
dif28b.mft djdev203.mft ed-02b.mft ed-02d.mft
faq230b.mft fil41b.mft fil41d.mft flx254b.mft
gcc321b.mft gcc321d.mft gdb53b.mft gmp412b.mft
gmp412d.mft gpc321b.mft gpp321b.mft grep24b.mft
gro116b.mft gwk306b.mft ind225b.mft ind229b.mft
ls080b.mft ls080d.mft lss374b.mft m4-14b.mft
mak3791b.mft man13b.mft misc13b.mft pakk022b.mft
pdcur24b.mft perl561b.mft pmcom10.mft rhide15b.mft
sed3028b.mft sed3028d.mft tar112ab.mft txi47b.mft
txt20b.mft unit180b.mft unit180s.mft

Installation is extremely easy - just unzip a file. The above is
far more than needed to compile C, and <http://www.delorie.com>
will lead you to a zip picker that will select exactly what you
need for the purpose.

--
Chuck F (cb********@yahoo.com) (cb********@worldnet.att.net)
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
<http://cbfalconer.home.att.net> USE worldnet address!

[Dan Pop]

In <41***************@yahoo.com> CBFalconer <cb********@yahoo.com> writes:

You are all omitting:

7. DJGPP

Which is much like MingW or CygWin, except that the underlying OS
is MsDos (or the simulation of MsDos available on Windoze).
As usual, you forgot to engage your brain before posting. From the OP's
request:

I am not a full-time programmer (anymore), nor do I plan to write
software either. I just want to play around and look at some of the
Open Source software that is out there for Windows.
^^^^^^^
I'm sure even you could tell the difference between the (extended) DOS
executables generated by DJGPP and Windows applications, if you try hard
enough.
Again,
the base compiler is gcc. There are some limitations, but again
the overall effect is much like having a Unix/Linux available.
Which is of no (apparent) interest to the OP. He wants to play with
Windows Open Source software.
Most
of GNU has been ported to it. The system will run on non-Microsoft
systems, such as FreeDos or DRDos, but does require a '386 or
better to function.
Finding a genuine 16-bit PC these days would be quite a feat...

Except for the fans of MSDOS and its clones, there is precious little
point in preferring DJGPP to the other gcc-based alternatives available
for Windows.

Once upon a time, the fact that it took less disk space than other
gcc ports did matter. Today, when 1 GB of disk space is less than
1 Euro/USD (being tired of making backups on DVDs, I have recently
bought a 160 GB *external* disk for 129 Euro), saving a few (or even
a few dozen) megabytes is no longer a relevant issue when choosing
one compiler over another.
I have the following packages installed at the present, some of
which (eg txt, fil, dif, bnu) contain multiple utilities:

You must have a severe ego problem if you believe that anyone else cares
about what you have installed or whom you're plonking.

Dan
--
Dan Pop
DESY Zeuthen, RZ group
Email: Da*****@ifh.de
Currently looking for a job in the European Union

[Hugh Cowan]

CBFalconer <cb********@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<41***************@yahoo.com>...

You are all omitting:

7. DJGPP

Which is much like MingW or CygWin, except that the underlying OS
is MsDos (or the simulation of MsDos available on Windoze). Again,
the base compiler is gcc. There are some limitations, but again
the overall effect is much like having a Unix/Linux available. Most
of GNU has been ported to it. The system will run on non-Microsoft
systems, such as FreeDos or DRDos, but does require a '386 or
better to function.

I have the following packages installed at the present, some of
which (eg txt, fil, dif, bnu) contain multiple utilities:

bc106b.mft bnu215b.mft bsh204b.mft bsn135b.mft
cdecl25b.mft cdecl25s.mft csc154b.mft CSDPMI5B.MFT
dif28b.mft djdev203.mft ed-02b.mft ed-02d.mft
faq230b.mft fil41b.mft fil41d.mft flx254b.mft
gcc321b.mft gcc321d.mft gdb53b.mft gmp412b.mft
gmp412d.mft gpc321b.mft gpp321b.mft grep24b.mft
gro116b.mft gwk306b.mft ind225b.mft ind229b.mft
ls080b.mft ls080d.mft lss374b.mft m4-14b.mft
mak3791b.mft man13b.mft misc13b.mft pakk022b.mft
pdcur24b.mft perl561b.mft pmcom10.mft rhide15b.mft
sed3028b.mft sed3028d.mft tar112ab.mft txi47b.mft
txt20b.mft unit180b.mft unit180s.mft

Installation is extremely easy - just unzip a file. The above is
far more than needed to compile C, and <http://www.delorie.com>
will lead you to a zip picker that will select exactly what you
need for the purpose.

Thanks for mentioning it. I have never heard of DJGPP before -- I
will also check it out.

Hugh,

[Mike Wahler]

"Hugh Cowan" <hw*****@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:46*************************@posting.google.co m...

Hello,

I am looking at getting a simple compiler for Windows that I can use
to play around with different Open Source software.

I am not a full-time programmer (anymore), nor do I plan to write
software either. I just want to play around and look at some of the
Open Source software that is out there for Windows.

Most of the applications are written in C, or C++ and therefore I
really just need a simple, decent compiler so that I can play around
with them.

I would prefer not to work with just a Command Line compiler as I
won't be using it everyday, and therefore won't remember all those
switches.

I won't recommend one compiler over another, but I can eliminate
your objection about remembering the switches: You can write
batch files to 'remember' them for you.

-Mike

[Dan Pop]

In <iy****************@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.n et> "Mike Wahler" <mk******@mkwahler.net> writes:

"Hugh Cowan" <hw*****@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:46*************************@posting.google.c om...

Hello,

I am looking at getting a simple compiler for Windows that I can use
to play around with different Open Source software.

I am not a full-time programmer (anymore), nor do I plan to write
software either. I just want to play around and look at some of the
Open Source software that is out there for Windows.

Most of the applications are written in C, or C++ and therefore I
really just need a simple, decent compiler so that I can play around
with them.

I would prefer not to work with just a Command Line compiler as I
won't be using it everyday, and therefore won't remember all those
switches.

I won't recommend one compiler over another, but I can eliminate
your objection about remembering the switches: You can write
batch files to 'remember' them for you.

And, once you get used to make files, you can simply put them in your
template make file (the file you use when creating a make file "from
scratch").

Dan
--
Dan Pop
DESY Zeuthen, RZ group
Email: Da*****@ifh.de
Currently looking for a job in the European Union

[Jim]

On 6 Oct 2004 11:22:49 -0700, hw*****@hotmail.com (Hugh Cowan) wrote:

anyone that I didn't
mention

http://www.openwatcom.org/

I can build lots of my Windows software using that.

Jim