Thread: Compiling Visual C++ code using a different compiler

I have a system of C++ code that was written using Visual C++ 2008 Express Edition. I need to run this code on a high-performance cluster that doesn't allow compilation with Visual C++; instead, the following compilers are available:

Gnu compilers 4.1
Intel compilers 11.1.056
PGI compilers 10.5
Java-1.6.0 -openjdk
Python 2.7.1

I was advised to check my code for any dependencies on the Visual C++ compiler, so that I can instead one of the above compilers. However, I'm not sure what to look for, that would indicate a Visual C++ dependency. Any suggestions?

Also, from the list above, is there one specific compiler that would be the best choice, if I'm switching from Visual C++ code to a new compiler?

Thanks! (I can post a more detailed description of my code system, if more specifics are needed.)

Thanks for the suggestion, bernt. I made this change, and recompiled the code; it worked! That's definitely a good sign. I suppose that my next step is to try compiling the code on the cluster, using one of the other compilers.

Does anyone have input about which of the compilers I listed in my OP would be my best choice, or are they all basically equivalent?

Thanks for your input, Elysia & grumpy. Yes, the Gnu compilers include GCC. I think I'm going to give the GCC a try, and I'll be sure to confirm that the code remains functional with the new compiler.

Note that the Intel compiler, while generating code that sometimes runs a bit faster (than GCC output) on Intel CPUs, arguably intentionally generates much worse code for non-Intel CPUs.

Agner`s CPU blog - Intel's "cripple AMD" function

Originally Posted by cyberfish

Note that the Intel compiler, while generating code that sometimes runs a bit faster (than GCC output) on Intel CPUs, arguably intentionally generates much worse code for non-Intel CPUs.

Agner`s CPU blog - Intel's "cripple AMD" function

much more likely they are able to perform undocumented optimisation routines for Intel CPUs but not for 3rd party CPUs, making the compilation unit perform better on Intel than other platforms.
I seriously doubt Intel would put their corporate reputation at stake by deliberately generating compilation units so as to perform poorly on non-Intel hardware.

much more likely they are able to perform undocumented optimisation routines for Intel CPUs but not for 3rd party CPUs, making the compilation unit perform better on Intel than other platforms.
I seriously doubt Intel would put their corporate reputation at stake by deliberately generating compilation units so as to perform poorly on non-Intel hardware.

It has nothing to do with undocumented optimizations. The article linked has a good explanation of what they did.

Note that there are several versions of GCC available for Windows systems. Look up cygwin or mingw for specifics. Installing them would allow you to compile & debug the code on your windows system before you had to move it over to another system. There's never a guarantee, but if it works on GCC w/ Windows there's at least a better chance of it porting over to GCC w/ whatever cleanly.

Thanks for the additional input. Given my previous good experiences with GCC, and cyberfish's caution about the Intel compiler, I'm planning to stick with the GCC compiler. I just learned that one of my colleagues has had experience with making the switch from Visual C++ to GCC, and recommended that instead of using numerous individual files, I should simply replace all of the "include" statements in main.cpp, with the actual files' contents -- he's able to compile on GCC using this method (and hasn't discovered any simpler way to do it that works).

What? You mean replacing all include statements with the actual files contents?
That's silly. You don't need to do that with any compiler.
Just compile all the .cpp files. Any good IDE will be able to do that for you. Code::Blocks, for example, works with GCC.

When you say, "just compile all the .cpp files": if the statement that works to compile the single main.cpp file is:

gcc main.cpp -o myExecutable

...what would your suggested alternative compile statement look like?