Re: Seeking recommendation on free or cheap C++ compiler
On Nov 12, 6:09 am, "Martin B." <0xCDCDC...@gmx.at> wrote:
Le Chaud Lapin wrote:
For example, I am on the ICU mailing list
(http://site.icu-project.org/), [essentially a String library],
and their download
package can be built using both the IDE and the command line.
This sounds rather like the ICU project has a focus on building it via
the GUI and the commandline build is a second class citizen.
I wouldn't generalize.
Well, for ICU, actually, it is the opposite: it is evident that from
the code structure that the authors love scripting/etc. The IDE one-
click build thing was put in as an after-thought. And even then, they
use the IDE in some cases as a glorified script driver, preepting the
IDE from doing what it does best: managing dependencies.
[Incidentally, this morning, I received 3 new posts from the ICU
support list about people having problems with such build scripts.]
My experiences only go so far as libXML2 and boost, but both libraries
are very easy to build via the commandline.
My experience is that when one is new, the approach is often slightly
different:
IDE:
(1) Load project. (2) Try to build. (3) Check errors. (4) Read docs
about configuration. (5) Build again.
CLI:
(1) Start favourite console. (2) Read docs about configuration. (3) Try
to build. (4) Check errors. (5) Build again.
Well, technically, if the author did what s/he is supposed to have
done, then there should be no errors, so one has to go with the
assumption that the build is error free. IMO, generating an error-free
build is more likely using the IDE than with the tedium of CLI.
Please note that I am not saying that the programmer should be
oblivious to sed/awk/make/randlib/etc...or their equivalents on
Windows. They should have an understanding of these things,
dependencies, the linker, etc. But, .after. these understandings, they
could move to the IDE.
An analogy might be C++ versus assembly. I believe that every C++
programmer should be able to write "Hello, World.", in assembly code,
of the kind that might be generated from a C++ compiler. After they do
this, then they can program in a macro-language (C++), and for
situations were some assembly is required, they augment their C++ with
assembly. They get the best of both worlds: micro understanding with
macro control and the option of reverting to micro control when
necessary.
[Quote MSDN]
About GDI+
Microsoft Windows GDI+ is the portion of the Windows XP operating system
or Windows Server 2003 operating system that provides two-dimensional
vector graphics, imaging, and typography.
[/Quote]
GDI+ is a drawing library and not a graphics library.
It isn't about getting a window up to the screen, so one should still
use a decent window library.
I agree, but every one that I have tried left me sighing.
The exception might be Mirek Filder's Ultimate C++, which I have not
used, but if I were to try one, I would try it first:
http://www.ultimatepp.org/
-Le Chaud Lapin-
--
[ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]
[ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]