A good C++ compiler

This is a discussion on A good C++ compiler within the C++ Programming forums, part of the General Programming Boards category; What is the best/ latest C++ compiler out there? I'm using Dev C++, is there anything wrong with that? What's ...

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    66

    A good C++ compiler

    What is the best/ latest C++ compiler out there? I'm using Dev C++, is there anything wrong with that? What's the advantage of a 'good' compiler?
    An Unofficial Cristiano Ronaldo Website : Ronaldo 7

  2. #2
    and the hat of wrongness Salem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    The edge of the known universe
    Posts
    32,672
    What are your definitions of 'best' and 'good' - it's all rather subjective (like what's the best car?)

    You get out there and test drive a few, then make a choice.

    A good compiler for a beginner is any which supports the ANSI standard.
    If you dance barefoot on the broken glass of undefined behaviour, you've got to expect the occasional cut.
    If at first you don't succeed, try writing your phone number on the exam paper.
    I support http://www.ukip.org/ as the first necessary step to a free Europe.

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    135
    The dev-c++ environment is 'good enough' if you're just learning. If you progress onto developing serious apps in a commercial environment in a team other issues come into play, standard conformance, executable size, compile time, support, etc., in which case you'd probably want to consider the latest version of Microsoft's Visual Studio or something similar.

  4. #4
    Cat without Hat CornedBee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,893
    The best compilers in ANSI C++ compliance are usually the latest GCC version and the since recently the latest Microsoft C++ compiler (the one that comes with Visual Studio.Net 2003).

    The Intel C++ compilers are quite good too. Version 8 is the latest I believe.
    All the buzzt!
    CornedBee

    "There is not now, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be, any programming language in which it is the least bit difficult to write bad code."
    - Flon's Law

  5. #5
    ¡Amo fútbol!
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    2,136
    Intel are known to be the best optimizing, but have no visual frontend. Oftentimes, companies may use MSVS as the graphic frontend and an intel compiler as a backend.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    367
    I use GCC for everything. Period.

  7. #7
    The Defective GRAPE Lurker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    949
    Borland, Borland, Borland.
    Do not make direct eye contact with me.

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    367
    I would much rather use Borland than use MSVC.

  9. #9
    Super Moderator VirtualAce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    9,596
    Depends on what you want to do:

    Applications = Borland - by far the easiest and best GUI
    Games/DirectX = MSVC - no compatibility problems like with Borland
    Networking = Either MSVC or Borland
    ActiveX/COM = Either MSVC or Borland
    32-bit DOS = DJGPP - very good compiler and free
    16-bit DOS: Turbo C/C++'s and Borland C++ 4.52

    MSVC is a very good compiler but I've heard that Intel's is better - but this is hearsay as I've never tested or compiled anything with Intel compilers. MSVC has a very confusing interface as do most of MS products - information overload if you ask me. Also MSVC has some very very cryptic error messages. Stuff I'm still trying to figure out.

    Borland has by far the best interfaces and best help files available. Very well put together and very nice frontend. Not good for DirectX because lots of alterations need to be done to get DirectX to work with Borland compilers. Data types and typedefs are different as well as a host of other things. MSVC works seamlessly with DirectX. But Borland compilers are very easy to use and their error messages are much more English than MSVC.

  10. #10
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    66
    Okay, thx guys.
    An Unofficial Cristiano Ronaldo Website : Ronaldo 7

  11. #11
    Cat without Hat CornedBee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,893
    The Intel compiler is definitly the best at optimizing for Intel CPUs. The MS compiler is not as good there, but better for AMD.

    The two are compatible, so you can simply replace VC++'s compiler with the Intel one.
    All the buzzt!
    CornedBee

    "There is not now, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be, any programming language in which it is the least bit difficult to write bad code."
    - Flon's Law

  12. #12
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    135
    Originally posted by bludstayne
    I use GCC for everything. Period.
    Dr Dobbs had a survey of C++ compilers in October (running on Win32), which included gcc. Although it had good standard conformance, compile time was poor and it produced the slowest and fattest code.

  13. #13
    and the hat of wrongness Salem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    The edge of the known universe
    Posts
    32,672
    > Dr Dobbs had a survey of C++ compilers in October
    Got a link for that?
    If you dance barefoot on the broken glass of undefined behaviour, you've got to expect the occasional cut.
    If at first you don't succeed, try writing your phone number on the exam paper.
    I support http://www.ukip.org/ as the first necessary step to a free Europe.

  14. #14
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    83
    I definately perfer GCC over MSVC. Much closer to ANSI standards (and it's open source). Free as in free beer, and free as in freedom.

  15. #15
    Skunkmeister Stoned_Coder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    2,572
    The last incarnation of MSVC is surprisingly good considerring just how bad msvc was until at least the .net version. Borland I haven't used in years but from memory it was a capable compiler. I think the most standards conforming compiler at the moment is comeau computings front end for the EDG compiler.
    GCC is okay although 3.2 has some conformance problems. Overall I prefer MSVC. Its perfect for my needs.
    Free the weed!! Class B to class C is not good enough!!
    And the FAQ is here :- http://faq.cprogramming.com/cgi-bin/smartfaq.cgi

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. Whats A Good Compiler?
    By katocan in forum C++ Programming
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 06-28-2005, 11:00 AM
  2. Which Compiler should I use?
    By jjj93421 in forum Game Programming
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 03-29-2004, 12:21 PM
  3. How good is the compiler of VS .NET Pro, really?
    By lightatdawn in forum Windows Programming
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-23-2004, 01:58 PM
  4. Where can I get a good old Turbo C compiler?
    By sundeeptuteja in forum C Programming
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-15-2002, 07:40 AM
  5. Good compiler for OpenGL (besides MS Visuial c++)
    By Crossbow in forum Game Programming
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-20-2001, 03:44 PM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21