Re: Need to choose a free compiler
- From: "Tom St Denis" <tomstdenis@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 30 Nov 2006 05:25:23 -0800
d3x0xr wrote:
LCC Win32 is a good solid lightweight compiler that is quick to generate
code, it's got an IDE with it.
LCC Win32 is decent but the optimizer sucks and his language extensions
are a bit goofy.
Open watcom (www.openwatcom.org) is the watcom compiler released into
public domain, supposed to support compiling (corss compiling) for linux
also. Also has an IDE with it.
Unless they added a lot to it I doubt it can out optimize GCC. Watcom
was the compiler of choice for x86 back in the day, mostly because the
competition was Turbo C. But GCC has a come a long way since then. It
was ousted even with heavyweights like ID Software who moved from
Watcom to DJGPP for Quake1.
Borland has a free version of it's 5.5 compiler available no IDE,
command line only.
Borland IDE suck bad. Visual Studio is a lot better and if I had to
get stuck between the two I'd side with MSFT. Both compilers though
suck fairly bad. (well newer msvc's are better but they're still far
from C99)
And of course, GCC. but for windows, GCC is not really an option,
cygwin is the most robust environment, but without special tweaks your
programs will be 1/4 the speed they should be.
use the -mno-cygwin option, boom faster. As another poster pointed out
Cygwin is meant for UNIX emulation on windows. If you are writing a
windows application just toss -mno-cygwin in your CFLAGS and be done
with.
GCC can often out optimize most professional compilers, it's closer to
C99 then Borland, MSVC, LCC, actively maintained and best of all it's
free software.
Tom
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Need to choose a free compiler
- From: Chris Hills
- Re: Need to choose a free compiler
- Prev by Date: Re: waht is kernel programs
- Next by Date: Re: variable allocated from stack/bss ??
- Previous by thread: Re: Need to choose a free compiler
- Next by thread: Re: Need to choose a free compiler
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|