I am under the impression Bloodshed Dev-C++ is an IDE that implements external GCC-based compilers.Quote:
There are numerous compilers available for C++ programming. One of the easiest compilers to use is the Bloodshed Dev compiler.
Printable View
I am under the impression Bloodshed Dev-C++ is an IDE that implements external GCC-based compilers.Quote:
There are numerous compilers available for C++ programming. One of the easiest compilers to use is the Bloodshed Dev compiler.
Dev-C++ uses the MingW ports of GCC and G++ by default but that you could change it if you so wished.
However what was said is not incorrect because most feel that the IDE is apart of the compiler when packaged as such.
I feel it's a misleading statement since, as the name suggests, an IDE is much, much more than a `compiler' and for a new programmer who knows no better, it may give them a false representation regarding the necessary tools for programming.
In my opinion, a compiler is a lot more impressive than an IDE, but that's just an opinion :) .Quote:
Originally Posted by Russell
My point is: an IDE is, in addition to a compiler, an editor, project manager, debugger, etc., therefore calling an IDE a compiler is false.
A new programmer really doesn't need to know the difference between a compiler, and IDE, projects, debugger, etc. Trying to learn all that in the beginning is a bit of an overload. Most know they need a compiler, Dev has a compiler and all the tools they need. So they can start off learning the language and as the learn more they'll learn the differences between all the tools and how to use them. But that comes with time.
I can't think of a single program that is an IDE and compiler. Most are broken up into the IDE and the compiler (though ones like Borland and VS don't allow you to change the compiler they use) but do it in a seemless fashion so the user doesn't notice that there are infact multiple programs working in the background.
http://www.cprogramming.com/other.html
Should read:Quote:
Bloodshed Dev 4.0 Don't be fooled by the name, this is a wonderful compiler. It is easy to set up, and it runs in windows. It can still create DOS programs, however. At six megabytes, it is not an excessively long download. If you want an easy to use free compiler (unless you want to donate $20, which is not required), try this one. For information on using this compiler, go here.
Bloodshed Dev 4.0 Don't be fooled by the name, this is a wonderful IDE (Integrated Development Environment). It is easy to set up, and it runs in windows. It can still create DOS programs, however. At six megabytes, it is not an excessively long download. If you want an easy to use free IDE (unless you want to donate $20, which is not required), try this one. For information on using this IDE, go here.
But it is MORE then a simple IDE, it is an IDE, compiler, debugger, project manager, and linker (you do know there is a difference between a compiler and a linker right? ) all rolled into one.
Without learning the tools, how can one be expected to learn a trade that implements the tools?Quote:
Originally Posted by Thantos
My point entirely. Thank you. =)Quote:
Originally Posted by Thantos
Check out the faq. For Dev-Cpp (listed in "Editors & IDE's") it reads:Quote:
Originally Posted by Russell
I'm inclined to agree with Thantos, however: for those starting out minimizing confusion between what different toolset are is arguably simpler. There are also precedents for such inaccuracies carrying forward in other disciplines for similarly utilitarian purposes. However, I think that documentation, such as that on cprog, should, where possible, resolve any such ambiguities in the interests of accuracy.Quote:
This is a very popular, open source (delphi) IDE for MinGW....
Personally, I used to get unconscionably irritated when I read someone refer to an 'ide' as a 'compiler' but i've since learned that pedantically correcting them is a wasted effort - they come to learn the difference in their own way and in their own time.
They will learn them in time. You don't start teaching algebra to first graders, you teach them how to count and simple math, and from there you build on to it until they eventually learn calculas. Its the same process with programming and it's tools. You go "this is a compiler where you write your code and hit the button", and eventually they will learn the differences between the IDE, the preprocessor, the compiler, and the linker. But in the beginning they do not need to know those parts.Quote:
Without learning the tools, how can one be expected to learn a trade that implements the tools?
I don't think you understand my point. The point is that the page was directed to new programers that do not know the differences between each of the tools. As such the term compiler was the most appropriate term to describe what Dev-C++ is. It is called writing for your audience.Quote:
My point entirely. Thank you. =)
How can you call something, something it's not? But then again, you probably call youself a programmer. ;)
Ah I love it when people resort to personal attacks when they can't think of a rational rebuttal.
Russell, find something worthwhile to argue about. Else, STFU.
course it is, DEV c++ (V4 at least) is written in delphi :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Lurker
When I was newer, I was confused on whether Dev-C++ was an actual compiler or just a code editor.
I think that the webmaster should tell them exactly what Dev-C++ is.
Having written my own language/compiler/interface, I have to say that it really does not matter what you call the thing. Eventually people will figure it out and call it what they choose, but that doesn't mean we should have a huge debate over the simple fact that bloodshed was called a compiler. I call my OpenScript compiler a compiler, just because I do, even though it is an IDE, it still compiles OpenScript code! People don't/shouldn't really care whether you call visual C++ a compiler or an IDE, because visual C++ is both.
I think this whole debate is kind of stupid/pointless honestly. Bloodshed compiles stuff, people call it a compiler, live with it.
>How can you call something, something it's not?
Because it helps newcomers to focus on more important things and experienced programmers to use simpler terminology to ease communication. For example:
This question relies on a lot of inside knowledge based on calling things something that they aren't. If you want to be more accurate then it would be more like this:Quote:
Originally Posted by One of Prelude's friends
Even that can be made more precise, but it completely hides the question being asked. We have quite a few people here who know the answer to the former question, but would be completely lost when asked the latter. I think you're being overly pedantic. ;)Quote:
Okay, I have a sequence of contiguous blocks of memory that represent addresses in C. Each of those blocks contains the address of unique chunks of contiguous memory returned by malloc that I'm using to simulate a sequence of contiguous blocks of memory that represent characters terminated by a character with the value of zero, but I don't know how to release the memory back to the process' memory pool so that it can be reused later in the execution of my program. Can you help?
0\/\/n3d HAHA.
I think Prelude makes the point the best. Honestly, when I started out programming, I didn't care what tools I was using. I was more interested in learning the language. I just wanted something that would compile it.... and at that point, I didn't care what it was (IDE, compiler, etc).
Its a good think Prelude is already taken...
ACK RUN AWAY!!!!Quote:
pedantic
no offense or anything, but how did you not know that? if you can edit your code, you're using a code editor... if you can compile your code, you're using a compiler... if you can do both you have to be using both...Quote:
Originally Posted by gcn_zelda
I was stupid, naive, and a wannabe back then...Quote:
Originally Posted by major_small
Not that much has changed :P