Where to download gcc for DOS/Windows

[Djuro.Tost]

Thanks in advance...

Robert...;)

[Nate Eldredge]

Dj********@gmail.com writes:

Thanks in advance...

Robert...;)

http://www.delorie.com/djgpp/ runs on DOS.
http://www.mingw.org/ is for Windows.

Further questions about these compilers would be better directed to a
forum specific to them. See the respective web pages for pointers.

[hydra]

Dj********@gmail.com;9218512 Wrote:

Thanks in advance...

Robert...;)

http://www.delorie.com/djgpp/
;)
--
hydra
------------------------------------------------------------------------
hydra's Profile: http://nettechguide.com/forums/member.php?u=416
View this thread: http://nettechguide.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2243904

[Richard Nixon]

On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 10:35:23 -0700, Nate Eldredge wrote:

Dj********@gmail.com writes:

>Thanks in advance...

Robert...;)

[reordered, for thematic reasons]

>
Further questions about these compilers would be better directed to a
forum specific to them. See the respective web pages for pointers.

I respect your opinion, but mine differs. I've got a brand new xp install
and have both of the below installed. I would like to get the following
pseudocode to work on both, and I hope to run them simultaneously.

#include <time.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>

int main(void)

time_t num1, num2, num_3;
int input, diff;
print *, "enter a number to make timer start"
read *, input
num1 = gettime()
print *, "time is ticking"
print *, "replying to this will stop the clock"
read *, input
num2 = gettime()
num3 = num2 - num1

// cast the result to a type you know how to print
diff = cast num3
printf %d "seconds elapsed were " \n, diff;

>
http://www.delorie.com/djgpp/ runs on DOS.
http://www.mingw.org/ is for Windows.

There exists a windows prejudice in clc. Such parochialism has nothing to
do with the C programming Language.
--
Richard Milhous Nixon

Golf is a good walk spoiled.
~~ Mark Twain

[jameskuyper]

Richard Nixon wrote:
.....

There exists a windows prejudice in clc. Such parochialism has nothing to
do with the C programming Language.

A disproportionate number of the people who post messages here in the
mistaken belief that implementation-specific messages are on-topic
here seem to be Windows users. However, I don't think that indicates a
prejudice in favor of Windows. It just reflects the demographic fact
that a disproportionate fraction of the people who are familiar with
programming on only one type of platform are Windows programmers. More
C programming is done on non-Windows platforms, but most of it is done
by people who are also familiar with the existence of Windows programs.

[Nate Eldredge]

Richard Nixon <ri*****@example.invalidwrites:

On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 10:35:23 -0700, Nate Eldredge wrote:

>Dj********@gmail.com writes:

>>Thanks in advance...

Robert...;)

[reordered, for thematic reasons]

>>
Further questions about these compilers would be better directed to a
forum specific to them. See the respective web pages for pointers.

I respect your opinion, but mine differs.

I think you would have a hard time finding answers to questions *about
the compilers* on comp.lang.c. E.g. "How do I install it, what's the
command to compile". Likewise with questions about the operating
systems they run on, or how to call their system-specific functions.
Even if you think this is on-topic here, and even if there are people
here that know the answers to your questions, from a purely pragmatic
view you're going to find that the volume of flames far exceeds that of
useful information.

I've got a brand new xp install
and have both of the below installed. I would like to get the following
pseudocode to work on both, and I hope to run them simultaneously.

#include <time.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>

int main(void)

time_t num1, num2, num_3;
int input, diff;
print *, "enter a number to make timer start"
read *, input
num1 = gettime()
print *, "time is ticking"
print *, "replying to this will stop the clock"
read *, input
num2 = gettime()
num3 = num2 - num1

// cast the result to a type you know how to print
diff = cast num3
printf %d "seconds elapsed were " \n, diff;

Great. You can do this in standard C, so it's on-topic here; it's a
question about the language, and not the compilers or the operating
system. The same program should work for both. I'd recommend you look
at the time() and difftime() functions, which are standard and are
provided by both implementations. For I/O, consider functions like
printf(), fgets(), or scanf(). If you have further questions, please
post again.

>http://www.delorie.com/djgpp/ runs on DOS.
http://www.mingw.org/ is for Windows.

There exists a windows prejudice in clc. Such parochialism has nothing to
do with the C programming Language.

I agree. However, many questions related to Windows don't have anything
to do with the C programming language per se either, and so would be
best taken elsewhere. That is not the case with what you've posted, so
no problems here.

[Peter Nilsson]

[e-mail] wrote:

Thanks in advance...

Robert...;)

Before there was Google Groups, there was Google...

http://www.google.com/search?q=gcc+dos+port
http://www.google.com/search?q=gcc+windows+port

--
Peter

[Richard Nixon]

On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 16:01:18 -0700 (PDT), ja*********@verizon.net wrote:

Richard Nixon wrote:
....

>There exists a windows prejudice in clc. Such parochialism has nothing to
do with the C programming Language.

A disproportionate number of the people who post messages here in the
mistaken belief that implementation-specific messages are on-topic
here seem to be Windows users. However, I don't think that indicates a
prejudice in favor of Windows. It just reflects the demographic fact
that a disproportionate fraction of the people who are familiar with
programming on only one type of platform are Windows programmers. More
C programming is done on non-Windows platforms, but most of it is done
by people who are also familiar with the existence of Windows programs.

A disproportionate number of the anti-windows zealots provide a
dispropprtionately large fraction of the serious assholes in this world.

They will usually equate *any* talk of how a person gets on with either
host or target OS to be like talk of women's lib among sandniggers:
anathema.

If K&R are the Holy Tablets, then one eighth of the time would be about
right. Maybe we should K â€* R , but not seven.
--
Richard Milhous Nixon

There's nothing drunker than a drunk Indian.
~~ Mark Twain

[Keith Thompson]

Richard Nixon <ri*****@example.invalidwrites:
[...]

They will usually equate *any* talk of how a person gets on with either
host or target OS to be like talk of women's lib among sandni**ers:
anathema.

[...]

Please keep your racist crap out of this newsgroup (or any other).

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Nokia
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <ln************@nuthaus.mib.org>,
Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.orgwrote:

>Richard Nixon <ri*****@example.invalidwrites:
[...]

>They will usually equate *any* talk of how a person gets on with either
host or target OS to be like talk of women's lib among sandniggers:
anathema.

[...]

Please keep your racist crap out of this newsgroup (or any other).

Quote fixed.

You are just sooooo cute.

[James Kuyper]

Richard Nixon wrote:
....

A disproportionate number of the anti-windows zealots provide a
dispropprtionately large fraction of the serious assholes in this world.

Perhaps, but I don't see much of that zealotry in this newsgroup. I
think that most of what you perceive in that fashion is just objections
to implementation-specific questions in general, not objections to
Windows-specific questions in particular.

They will usually equate *any* talk of how a person gets on with either
host or target OS to be like talk of women's lib among sandniggers:
anathema.

If you were trying to demonstrate the filth that fills your mind for in
place of actual thought, you succeeded.

However, if you were trying to accurately describe what happens on this
newsgroup, you failed. The problem isn't talking about the host or
target OS; the problem is when someone asks a question whose answer
depends upon the host or target OS. Any such question is better answered
by the people who monitor newsgroups specific to that OS. That's no more
a matter of anti-windows zealotry than it is a matter of anti-Unix or
anti-Mac zealotry. It just means that there are better places to get an
answer to answer any such question.

If K&R are the Holy Tablets, then one eighth of the time would be about
right. Maybe we should K â€* R , but not seven.

Well, that's sufficiently obscure - are there some words missing that
would turn that into a sentence that makes sense? But I presume you're
trying to imply that some people here treat K&R like divine
commandments. No one here does that. K&R is a very good book for
describing the C language; no more, no less, and there's no one here who
treats it as anything more than that. The language it describes was
fairly well designed, at least in the opinion of most of the people who
are interested in a forum devoted to that language, but no one's has
ever implied that they thought it was divinely inspired. K&R is not the
best textbook for everyone, though I can't vouch for that from personal
experience - it was a great textbook for me.

[Richard Nixon]

On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 17:59:27 -0700, Keith Thompson wrote:

Richard Nixon <ri*****@example.invalidwrites:
[...]

>They will usually equate *any* talk of how a person gets on with either
host or target OS to be like talk of women's lib among sandni**ers:
anathema.

[...]

Please keep your racist crap out of this newsgroup (or any other).

It takes someone the size of Keith Thompson to think that gurth is
sufficient so that his editorial prerogatives applies to places where he's
a joke.

How many "brownies" has your government killed?

Are you the ayatollah?
--
Richard Milhous Nixon

It is my belief that nearly any invented quotation, played with confidence,
stands a good chance to deceive.
~~ Mark Twain

[Martin Ambuhl]

Richard Nixon wrote:

On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 17:59:27 -0700, Keith Thompson wrote:

>Richard Nixon <ri*****@example.invalidwrites:
[...]

>>They will usually equate *any* talk of how a person gets on with either
host or target OS to be like talk of women's lib among sandni**ers:
anathema.

[...]

Please keep your racist crap out of this newsgroup (or any other).

It takes someone the size of Keith Thompson to think that gurth is
sufficient so that his editorial prerogatives applies to places where he's
a joke.

How many "brownies" has your government killed?

Are you the ayatollah?

No, but you do seem to be a dyed-in-the-wool racist who insists on now
twice injecting his crap into this newsgroup. And learn to spell
"girth". At least I won't be seeing anymore of you in this newsgroup.