Printable View
I am seriously considering getting MSVC++ but there are several different versions. Which one would be good for me
- Intermediatish Programmer
- Dont want to spend a bundle
- Want it to be upto date and fully functional with all of todays stuff/standards
[edit]
Alot of you seem to be using MSVC 6.0... Is that a recent version?
>>Is that a recent version?
MSVC .NET is the most recent version. 6 (the one I'm using) is less standard and has a few bugs in the standard headers that you have to fix yourself, although there's docs on most of them. [edit]It's the predecessor of .NET, so it's reasonably recent.[/edit]
>>Dont want to spend a bundle
Since 6 is now 'out of date', it'll probably be cheaper. It works fine for me, standard and bugs or no (I got the pro edition at academic pricing a few years ago... around $300 discount when I bought it).
>>Want it to be upto date and fully functional with all of todays stuff/standards
I haven't had any problems with out-of-datedness yet. It's pretty stable and complies reasonably well with the standard - though far from perfectly - and since the standard hasn't changed to the best of my knowledge, I don't see any reason why it should be out of date. Todays stuff and standards is pretty much just higher versions of OpenGL and DirectX, maybe higher Windows SDK. But if you don't mind the trouble, you can download them from the web anyways.
I've heard some say that NET's IDE rocks, kicks 6's butt, but I've also heard others say it's too cluttered and hard to find anything while 6 is simple and clean. But I haven't seen NET, so I can't offer anything other than hearsay about it.
[edit2]I was thinking of moving to .NET for the better standard compliance, but it costs an arm and a leg (and I've only got 2 of each), so I'll see if I can get a learning edition free - or better, standard edition - from a school course in the future or something.[/edit2]
Ok, I'll assume that these bugs are either easy to fix or not to much of a bother?
I would hate to pay that much for something if other free IDE's ( Dev-Cpp / MinGW Studio ) do a better job!
VC++6 (compiler version 6.0) is outdated and has weak support for templates. The STL header files contain bugs and incompletenesses. This can be largely solved by using a different STL.
VC++.Net 2002 (compiler version 7.0) has a new STL, but still the same problems with templates. The IDE is, IMHO, pretty much the same. IntelliSense is harder to confuse than in 6, but still easy enough.
VC++.Net 2003 (compiler version 7.1) has a very up-to-date compiler which has excellent standards compliance. The STL, too, us updated to make use of this.
VC++.Net 2003 is high in prize, unless you can perhaps get a student version somewhere. The commmand line tools (compiler, linker, debugger, ...) are freely available for download from MS.
Dev-C++ now has a very standards-compliant compiler (gcc3.x) and from what I've heard a good IDE.
Before getting anything but .Net2003 I'd rather go for Dev-C++. But then, I'm very fond of advanced template games.
>>VC++6 (compiler version 6.0) is outdated
What defines outdated in a language that doesn't change?
>> and has weak support for templates.
I rarely use templates, so I can't comment. The basic things I've done with templates seem to work fine for me.
>>The STL header files contain bugs and incompletenesses.
Fair enough. But you can find bugs and fixes on the internet, which are fairly easy to fix (run the STL function in the debugger; continually step deeper into the implementation until you reach the target code, then replace it and save).
>>I would hate to pay that much for something if other free IDE's ( Dev-Cpp / MinGW Studio ) do a better job!
I can make no guarantees, since I've never used the others ;)
Actually, I just received a 'visual studio' set today from a web course that I registered for. I haven't gotten a chance to look at it, but I'm hoping it's .NET and includes MSVC - although with only 3 cd's, I highly doubt it.
Maybe a compiler that is almost 10 years old, came out before the one and only language standard, and has had one major version and several minor upgrades that have been released since it was?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunter2
I tried this.
And it compiled without any errors with the MSVC++ 6.0 compiler.Code:#include <iostream>
int main ( void )
{
std::cout << "Ah";
return 0;
}
This is also standard, but MSVC++ gives warnings. There are other more complicated examples of standard code that doesn't compiler in 6.0. A lot of the standard code works because they used a draft of the standard (or so I've heard) when doing 6.0, but they finished the compiler before they finished the standard.Code:#include <iostream>
int main ()
{
std::cout << "Ah";
}
Oh, I see.
Maybe these things are fixable?
Since the command line tools are free, wouldnt it be possible to "update" the compiler by downloading the most recent command line tools?
That's something I've been wondering too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicious
>>Maybe a compiler that is almost 10 years old, came out before the one and only language standard
I see. That might do it, I suppose :)
And speaking of that visual studio that I just got... Interestingly enough, it's Visual Studio 6.0 Professional, and includes both Visual Basic and C++. It would seem that I got half of my wish - it came with C++, but it came with the one that I already had :rolleyes:
It is possible to inject the 7.1 compiler into the 6.0 IDE. However, some compiler switches are incompatible, so you may end up with unexpected errors on setting some project option.
What you can download from Microsoft, right now, for free:
- the latest and greatest, C/C++ optimizing compiler
- the latest MS C Runtime Library
- the latest MS Standard C++ Library including STL
As CornedBee mentioned, the VS 6.0 IDE can be configured to use the new compiler and link tools (haven't had time to try this out myself) as well as the latest C and C++ libraries.
Want an IDE and debugger too? You can download one from Microsoft right now for free as well.
http://cboard.cprogramming.com/showthread.php?t=56549
gg
I debate your "greatest" assertion with these two facts:
1. total absence of C99 support
2. small number of machine targets, all of which are MS Windows targets
gcc by contrast has some C99 support and a large number of targets, including Windows ones as well other OS platforms (mostly *nix of course)
Well, my intention was "Microsoft's latest and greatest", but it may not read that way, sorry.
Saying Microsoft's compilers are for Microsoft OS's is stating the obvious[edit]perhaps not to everyone, sorry again[/edit]. And there's no C99 support because very few people in the Microsoft development community care about it.
The VC++ maintainers discuss C99 a little in this article: The future of the VC++ language and ANSI/ISO standards compliance
ISO C++ conformance is discussed in this article: Conformance to ISO Standards for C++
gg
You can get Visual C++ .NET Standard for about $100. This should be adequate for any personal/individual/educational purposes. The next step-up is Visual Studio for about $1000 (non-acedemic discount), which includes Visual Basic, C#, and J# (???).Quote:
Which one would be good for me
You can add Visual C++ 2005 Express Beta to that free-list. This is the full Windows IDE program... not a command line interface. If you don't like the Express version, you can get the beta release of Visual Studio Enterprise on a CD for the cost of the postage! (I'm not sure if you can download it.)Quote:
What you can download from Microsoft, right now, for free:
- the latest and greatest, C/C++ optimizing compiler
- the latest MS C Runtime Library
- the latest MS Standard C++ Library including STL
There is a list of free compilers at TheFreeCountry.com.
6.0 came out in late 1998. Then, they changed their version-numbering scheme and released MSVC++ 2002 .NET.Quote:
MSVC 6.0... Is that a recent version?
If you can get the Standard version of .NET (which doesn't have the optimizing compiler) for $100, and you can get the optimizing compiler for free (which doesn't have the GUI), and you can change your IDE to use whatever compiler you want, can't you just get the standard version and use the optimizing compiler for the same price??
yea the standard version of Visual Studio .NET, if you go to half
price books (do a google search, i think halfpricebooks.com is the
link but im to lazy to check it right now) but for 40 bucks or so
you can get a copy of standard VS.NET with a pretty decent
book and 3 disk of MSDN. Id say thats pretty cheap.
Just out of curiousity, does anybody know what the differences are between Express and Standard? I figure they probably remove features but does it come with a license that allows you to sell your finished program? Because I had heard it didn't allow that with the academic but that version always seemed to be just a standard version.
>> Just out of curiousity, does anybody know what the differences are between Express and Standard?
If you're just looking for C/C++ tools to write and debug applications, there is very little difference. Part of what's missing from the Express verison is all the wizards and integrated tools for supporting MFC and ATL.
The Express download is Beta software and will cost $$$ when it is no longer Beta. Part of using Beta software is that it "is for testing and evaluation purposes only" and "you cannot publicly deploy any applications you create with the beta". Those quotes are from the Express products Frequently Asked Questions
>> can't you just get the [Visual C++] standard version and use the [free] optimizing compiler ...
Makes sense to me, I'll be trying that out with VC++ 6.0 Enterprise when I get some time. Like CornedBee mentioned, the bigest hurdles are probably compiler switches that are no longer in line with the Visual Studio project settings UI.
There are lots of freely available IDE's out there and I would investigate the possibilities of using gdb as a debugger. The MS compiler is capable of generating different debug-info formats and gdb can certainly understand more than one.
gg