Which Compiler?

I am currently writing software for a small Single Board Computer (SBC). I am developing the software in C/C++ ( I would like to stick to C if I can). I am currently using the ancient Turbo C++ 3.0 Compiler but I would like to upgrade. People have suggested Microsoft Visual C++ 2008 Express Edition but I'm concerned about the implications of my compiler choice on the final product since the SBC only runs DOS. I would prefer an IDE over a command line compiler, but if a command line compiler is a better choice...

Oh, and the compiler needs to be free too :P

Thanks in advance

Unfortunately, if all you have is DOS, then you are stuck with 16-bit compilers, and whilst Turbo C is not great (and in particular, it is not MODERN), it is still one of the few easily available DOS compilers. Doubt you will find something MUCH better. Microsoft Visual C 1.52 used to be another 16-bit compiler. Don't know if it's available anywhere.

--
Mats

That is what I was afraid of...

Of course, if you are not using too much "DOS stuff" (or the "DOS stuff" is isolated enough), you could always compile the whole project for Windows in a modern compiler, and then recompile it only when you have it working for the target system. This doesn't work if you are using special hardware on the SBC, of course.

--
Mats

Aren't there any 16-bit versions of gcc around?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cpjust

Aren't there any 16-bit versions of gcc around?

---

Not that I'm aware of. For Xen, which needs a BIOS built to do hardware supported virtual machines, we used bcc (which is NOT the Borland compiler) to compile the BIOS code. But for a DOS type environment, Turbo C is probably better.

--
Mats

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cpjust

Aren't there any 16-bit versions of gcc around?

---

You can use GCC to build 16-bit code, but it's hacky. Insert this at the very beginning of the .c file (outside of all functions, and before anything else):

Code:

---

__asm__(".code16");

---

I've done this before, but I make no guarantees!

EDIT: Of course, gas is going to produce ELF output unless you're running a weird version of gas. This ELF will have to be massaged into a flat binary:

Code:

---

gcc -c foo.c
ld -o foo foo.o
objcopy -O bin foo foo.bin

---

Or something like that. You'll need a linker script to configure the right address space.

What is the newest version of Turbo C that would work for me?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bladactania

What is the newest version of Turbo C that would work for me?

---

Maybe you could try this this is a command line compiler. It's Borland C++ compiler 5.5.

> Maybe you could try this this is a command line compiler. It's Borland C++ compiler 5.5
But it doesn't produce 16-bit executables.

These also generate 16-bit DOS code
http://www.openwatcom.org/index.php/Main_Page
http://www.digitalmars.com/

DJGPP generates 32-bit DOS code, but you would also need a DOS extender running as well to support that.

I'm no expert on Turbo C, but I have used it (as Turbo C/C++ ver. 1.01), quite a bit, and still do, sometimes.

I've been told that Turbo C ver 2.n (not the same as Turbo C/C++), was buggy, and to avoid it. Turbo C/C++ on the other hand, is fine. You'll want to set it up to compile your *.c programs, with the C compiler, rather than the C++ one. (it's a simple option you choose in the IDE).

I like ver. 1.01 of Turbo C/C++. Oddly, it's newer than Turbo C ver. 2.n, I've been told. It's available at the Borland legacy site, google for the url.

If your console screen buffers are too small, you'll only get a 1/2 size of the IDE window, which is horrid. Once you set up the screen buffers, and make your properties for the shortcut to it that you'll want, show full screen, then you'll be fine.