|
|
|
This thread is locked; no one can reply to it.
|
1
2
|
| What's your favourite compiler/IDE/language ? |
|
Thomas Harte
Member #33
April 2000
 |
MSVC can also make use of precompiled header files, which saves a lot of parsing with some of the standard includes . . . [My site] [Tetrominoes] |
|
dudaskank
Member #561
July 2000
 |
Compiler: gcc ^__^ Toque a balada do amor inabalável, eterna love song de nós dois |
|
ReyBrujo
Moderator
January 2001
 |
GCC + Vim, anything better? grin RB -- |
|
Derezo
Member #1,666
April 2001
 |
Just a note on the speed thing.. it compiles instantly all the time. Every compile. I can go through and add a space to all my files, hit ctrl+F5, enter and it runs. Instantly. It's not a teeny tiny program either, around 1000 lines of code.. I have fblend too if that should slow it down.. Just seems really really eerie to me.. "He who controls the stuffing controls the Universe" |
|
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
 |
I bet MSVC is smarter than that. Try changing code? Who knows. I wonder how fast MSVC would compile my 12000 line SpeedHack2002B entry, that Im still working on? -- |
|
Derezo
Member #1,666
April 2001
|
It compiles all the files when you add a space but, even if I remove the *.obj files it's instant. "He who controls the stuffing controls the Universe" |
|
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
|
Or maybe it just looks at it... And does nothing? But then I doubt it -- |
|
Korval
Member #1,538
September 2001
 |
Quote: GCC + Vim, anything better? *grin* Well, VC++ is superior to any and all forms of GCC, if for no other reason than fast linking. Quote: Just a note on the speed thing.. it compiles instantly all the time. Every compile. I can go through and add a space to all my files, hit ctrl+F5, enter and it runs. Instantly. It's not a teeny tiny program either, around 1000 lines of code.. I have fblend too if that should slow it down.. VC++ uses an incremental link process. That means it doesn't do nearly as much computation for subsequent links as, for example, GCC, DJGPP, MingW, or most compilers not named VC++. Oh, and a 1000 line program is small. Especially with a good CPU and memory, VC++ can compile and link that in less than a second or so. Linking with external libraries isn't difficult for it either. |
|
topaz22
Member #2,049
March 2002
 |
i use: vi(m) + gcc, because of portability, ease of editing/compiling on any platform. i have not seen an editor with more features than vi. it may be cryptic initially, but i've been using it for more than 10 years, its second nature. |
|
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
|
I bet EMACSen have more features than VI -- |
|
Peter Wang
Member #23
April 2000
|
Believe me, vim is catching up in the bloat department ;-) Emacs or Vim? Both, thankyouverymuch.
|
|
Mars
Member #971
February 2001
 |
Well, I'm on Win XP and use MinGW32 with C++ and edit it with EditPlus. What I'm waiting for is a MinGW with a more current compiler which would work with standard C++, i.e. I'm awaiting the release of GCC 3.1. That should have been out in mid april. I don't reckon anybody knows when it's going to be released? Furthermore,I would like to use EditPlus with a more powerful syntax highlighting. Why can't I make my operators and numbers colourful? Apart from that it is the editor that pleases me the most up to now. If Anyedit was stable, I might use that instead. Does anybody know where I can get a windows version of the Insight debugger that works with MinGW? -- |
|
Phantom
Member #1,457
August 2001
 |
Thank you all for reacting. Considering the number of people using msvc I tried it today and I have to say it really is a nice environment for allegro programming |
|
Sirocco
Member #88
April 2000
 |
I'm a bit late, but... For DOS-only apps I use Rhide/DJGPP. For Win32 apps I stick with Dev-C++/MingW32. I've used C++ Builder and Delphi extensively at previous jobs, but I wouldn't use them by choice. C++ is my lang of choice. --> |
|
Murray Bozinsky
Member #696
October 2000
 |
I develop my Allegro-stuff under Windows 98 se using pure C compiled with Mingw32 (gcc). My favourite IDE is Edit+. Sometimes I do some non-allegro related coding under DOS using Borland C++ 3.1 and Borland Turbo Assembler 5.1 |
|
Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
 |
I use win98se and for DOS apps I use C++ /w DJGPP+RHIDE and of course, allegro. For windows apps I use visual C++ /w MS-DX, OpenGL, and allegro. Linux...no thank you. I've always liked the FAT system better then the one unix uses. -----sig: |
|
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
|
Quote: Linux...no thank you. I've always liked the FAT system better then the one unix uses. Why? I'll never have to defrag or scandisk again. How about you? -- |
|
wolfman8k
Member #508
July 2000
 |
I programmed most of my game carterrain in pure emacs under linux. Recently I discovered nedit. It's a nice editor. The only thing is I can't get it to work as an IDE the way emacs would. I found this addon though called programmer_tools.tar.gz that might help. Too bad I can't get it to compile
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
|
ITM
Member #798
November 2000
 |
BeOS : BeIDE/Gcc/C |
|
Gabhonga
Member #1,247
February 2001
 |
c(++) compilers: mingw/djgpp I've heard good word about the watcom compiler becoming opensource at the moment...does anyone know about whether it's already usable, at least for dos development? it'd be somewhat nice not to have to dangle around with djgpp's floating segment anymore to be glad of having nearptr's around..!! -------------------------------------------------------- |
|
|
1
2
|
I tried to learn how to use Emacs... But the fact that you need a key sequence just to exit either editor frightens me.
I never liked msvc for anything else though.
