C...Originally Posted by Elysia
No were in my code i've included cstdio.h... Don;t know where's that coming from
C...
No were in my code i've included cstdio.h... Don;t know where's that coming from
Ah, but you #include <string>, which is a C++ standard header. Perhaps you wanted to #include <string.h> instead.
Look up a C++ Reference and learn How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
No Difference... Is there anyone using Visual Studio 2003/2005/2008 who can just copy my code and try compiling it as .c?
Oh right, I saw it in the error output.
Anyway, you are using C, yet you are using C++ stuff like std::string.
Seriously, that code needs to rego a big change and either you need to learn C or stick to learning C++, because this code cannot compile as C (namespaces aren't supported in C either).
Thought about that too, will fix such and come back to you... Thnx
Actually, when i though about that, i commented every CPP code style but still got the same errors... But will go through my code to make sure is 100% C
First thing I turn off in new projects, usually in the wizard, or first thing if the wizard wont let me (win32 projects). The savings even on large projects are negligiable. I have one project that has 100,000 lines of code in ~100 files, each including ~5 headers. It takes about 2 minutes to compile with PCH and 2 minutes 30 seconds without. I dont honestly see the point. I suppose if you had millions of lines of code and tens of thousands of #include's it migth make a bigger difference, but again, whats the point, you will still be compiling for an hour.
IMO they woudl get better performance by multithreading the compile. FileA can be compiled in parallel with FILEB, the linker stage would probably still need to be serial, but not compilation.
Last edited by abachler; 05-15-2008 at 09:17 AM.
Visual Studio is terribly slow with large projects but is reported to be faster than most other compilers. Pre-compiled headers are far more headache than they are worth which is why at home I don't use them and we also do not use them at work.
I've noticed that even on a quad-core machine VS2003 and VS2005 take one core up to 100% and leave the other three at 0%. The compile is multithreaded insofar as you can still interact with the GUI but I seriously doubt if the compile process itself is multi-threaded. It 'appears' to be one thread.
Honestly, i think the whole multithreading thing kind of caught most companies by surprise, it was never a serious technique until multi-core made it give huge performance increases. Now I see hundreds of black box 'turn yoru serial code into parallel code without having to think' solutions. OpenMP, RapidMind, CUDA, although the last 2 are really for use with GPU's its only a matter of time before CPU's support native vector processing. I wouldn't mind, but I end up having to evaluate every new flavor of the month and then explain to the suit why it wont improve our applications or reduce development time (it mostly has to do with some internally closed source libraries that he wont let me get the code to so I can't optimize them).
The only real reason I can see to use PCH is to obfuscate a distributed LIB so thay cant even see your class structure.
Last edited by abachler; 05-15-2008 at 04:47 PM.
I think somewhere both of you have had bad experiences, because I really don't get what you do.
PCH speeds up compiles greatly. You just have to include windows.h and you'll notice how fast it gets. 30 seconds is a big deal if you ask me.
PCH are not difficult to use and they are not error prone (at least not to me). I haven't received any problems with them pretty much in any project I have. Just don't include headers that keep on changing. Only static non-changing headers go there and you should have no problems whatsoever.
So far as I know, VS can only do multi-threaded compile with different projects, because I really have been unable to get it compiling on anything else than one core in one project.
Yeah I know it only uses a single thread, I was just saying they would get better performance increases by going MT than by saddling us with PCH. 30 seconds on a 2 minute compile is nothing, since Im going to get a water and bull........ with a collegue anyway.
Yes, MT with a single project would be great. Additionally, I think there is something along the lines of that, or should be, but I've never gotten something like that to work.
In this case your not slacking, your code is compiling. Just like the shirt says....since Im going to get a water and bull........ with a collegue anyway.
I need one of those shirts. My boss is always acting like he is catching me slacking when Im just thinkingIn this case your not slacking, your code is compiling. Just like the shirt says.
Last edited by abachler; 05-15-2008 at 09:25 PM.
Ok, took me a while but managed to convert all the code to pure C... I now can compile but down to two warnings... This has to do with the ID of the child window
What you see above is a C++ style, converting into C ...Code:HWND CreateButton(const HWND hParent,const HINSTANCE hInst,DWORD dwStyle, const RECT& rc,const int id,const ustring& caption) { dwStyle|=WS_CHILD|WS_VISIBLE; return CreateWindowEx(0, _T("button"), caption.c_str(), dwStyle, rc.left, rc.top, rc.right, rc.bottom, hParent, reinterpret_cast<HMENU>(static_cast<INT_PTR>(id)), hInst, 0); }
... gives a warningCode:(HMENU)id
Ignoring this warning disables the minimize/restore/close buttons on the window... Any ideas on how to convert this properly?Code:warning C4312: 'type cast' : conversion from 'int' to 'HMENU' of greater size
