Prev: Using Boost.Spirit in production code
Next: Arguement against NULLing a pointer after delete?
From: tohava on 11 Nov 2009 02:51
> 1. Free or cheap.

gcc. VC++ express.

>
> 2. Compiler for Windows. Currently running XP, may upgrade to Win7
> at some point.

gcc has windows versions.

>
> 3. Definitely want an integrated GUI development environment, not
> command line.

dev-c++.

>
> 4. Biggest problem <snipped>
Tough one... If you use gcc i'd recommend trying Qt, which I believe
has a tool for creating GUIs visually. I think VC++ express should
also help with this.


--
[ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]
[ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]

From: Martin B. on 11 Nov 2009 08:08
Michael Aaron Safyan wrote:
> On Nov 10, 11:19 pm, Jay <greengrass...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>> I am not a programmer, but have a technical background, and studied
>> programming quite a few years back, including some classes in C and C+
>> +. I am seeking to get back up to speed in C++ on a hobby basis, so
>> I'm trying to figure out which compiler to get now. A search on the
>> web reveals lots of compilers, but it's hard to know which ones meet
>> my needs. Hoping someone can help. My requirements:
>>
>> 1. Free or cheap.
>
> The GNU Compiler Collection (GCC) is free and the de-facto standard
> for compilers. (Alternative compilers such as LLVM and xlc++, as a
> general rule, provide a compatible front-end that can accept the same
> options as GCC. The Visual Studio compiler is the rare exception, not
> the rule).
>

Hmm ... it would be interesting where and on what you work to claim such
a thing. (It would also be nice to add some references to such claims.)

I would have said the opposite: Visual Studio is the default for
Windows-Only SW which seems to be sort of a default for much desktop
software.

>> 2. Compiler for Windows. Currently running XP, may upgrade to Win7
>> at some point.
>>
>
> Cygwin is a good way of installing GCC. The Win7 version is currently
> in beta. I am not sure of how stable it is.
>

Hmm ... what benefit does the Cygwin environment add to GCC vs. MinGW ??

cheers,
Martin

--
[ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]
[ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]

From: Andrew on 11 Nov 2009 08:00
On 11 Nov, 05:19, Jay <greengrass...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> I am not a programmer, but have a technical background, and studied
> programming quite a few years back, including some classes in C and C+
> +. I am seeking to get back up to speed in C++ on a hobby basis, so
> I'm trying to figure out which compiler to get now. A search on the
> web reveals lots of compilers, but it's hard to know which ones meet
> my needs. Hoping someone can help. My requirements:
>
> 1. Free or cheap.

gcc (aka g++). It is free (as in freedom) software, which is also free
(as in beer).

>
> 2. Compiler for Windows. Currently running XP, may upgrade to Win7
> at some point.

gcc is available for windoze via cygwin. There is also minGW which
compiles down to native apps without needing something like the cygwin
DLL.

>
> 3. Definitely want an integrated GUI development environment, not
> command line.

Eclipse is a great IDE that has a C++ plugin. There is also a version
called Wascana on sourceforge that has set things up for use with the
gcc toolchain. I reckon this will suit you just fine.

>
> 4. Biggest problem I had back in the past was creating a GUI. I
> tried to learn MFC, it was a total bear.

Why am I not suprised.

> Ideally I'd like something
> that makes GUI creation with C++ as intuitive and easy as with Visual
> Basic

Try looking at wxWidgets. It also happens to be cross-platform. If you
fancy something easier (but not quite as good) you can try FLTK (Fast,
Light ToolKit). It comes with a GUI builder called 'fluid'.

Regards,

Andrew Marlow


--
[ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]
[ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]

From: Nick Hounsome on 11 Nov 2009 08:02
On 11 Nov, 05:19, Jay <greengrass...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> I am not a programmer, but have a technical background, and studied
> programming quite a few years back, including some classes in C and C+
> +. I am seeking to get back up to speed in C++ on a hobby basis, so
> I'm trying to figure out which compiler to get now. A search on the
> web reveals lots of compilers, but it's hard to know which ones meet
> my needs. Hoping someone can help. My requirements:
>
> 1. Free or cheap.
>
> 2. Compiler for Windows. Currently running XP, may upgrade to Win7
> at some point.
>
> 3. Definitely want an integrated GUI development environment, not
> command line.
>
> 4. Biggest problem I had back in the past was creating a GUI. I
> tried to learn MFC, it was a total bear. Ideally I'd like something
> that makes GUI creation with C++ as intuitive and easy as with Visual
> Basic, and failing that, something like Java (which I found
> challenging, but doable). I want to be able to focus on developing
> the background logic (I'm planning to do some simple neural network
> and other AI programming, for example), I don't want to be messing for
> hours trying to create a simple dialog box or other user interface.
> The development environment should make that part easy, and hide the
> MFC complexities (or whatever has replaced MFC these days).
>
> Thanks in advance for all replies.

IMHO C++ language is not a language to go for "on a hobby basis" at
least in part because of the GUI issue.

If you want something C++ like (very loosely) I suggest you go for C#
and the free "express" IDE from MS

If you want something more interactive I suggest one of the scripting
languages as supplied by ActiveState (Tcl, Perl, Python)

If you realy want to play C++ I suggest that you stick to command line
apps.
Maybe try http://www.bloodshed.net/download.html for an IDE or the MS
express version.
Under no circumstances should you attempt to use MFC. Qt might be best
for you.


--
[ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]
[ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]

From: Le Chaud Lapin on 11 Nov 2009 15:46
On Nov 11, 1:31 pm, Michael Aaron Safyan <michaelsaf...(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> 1.) A visual environment is very difficult to automate, whereas
> commandline invocations are easy to automate.
> 2.) Commandline invocations allow your program to be built quickly.
> 3.) Commandline invocations allow your program to be built
> automatically.

IMO, this is a common misconception regarding IDE's.

I got my start in VMS, then Unix, then Windows, and have been using
Visual Studio since the days of Quick C, and whatever can be done with
using command line, scripts, whatever, I can do that, plus more, with
the IDE.

I have seen that people who make this IDE/command-line argument
typically have not put as much time into the IDE as they have into the
command line [I am not saying you are necessarily one of those people,
Michael]. In any case, after having experienced both methods for at
least 7 years each, there is no way I will revert to using a command
line to manage 50,000-line projects.

For example, I am on the ICU mailing list (http://site.icu-
project.org/), [essentially a String library], and their download
package can be built using both the IDE and the command line. The IDE
build method is simple: there is one file. You load this file into the
IDE, then hit the button labeled "BUILD", and sit back and watch. The
command line system, OTOH, causes world-class programmers from
prominent organizations to issue on average 2-3 emails per day on the
support list struggling to get the large mess of make files and build
scripts to work. The build itself becomes a multi-week effort. One
poster recently claimed 72,000 error using the build scripts.
Naturally, there is always some "workaround", in the form of yet more
scripting, to fix what should never have been broken in the first
place.

To the OP:

The Visual Studio 2008 Express C++ compiler is state of the art.

Think of it as a high-end BMW with nice-to-have premium features like
independent climate control, high-watt audio amp, and heated-back-
massager removed. That's what VS Expres is: less than what you would
get as a paying customer, but still a ~disturbingly~ nice vehicle.

As far as GUI programming goes..I hope you will not be lured into
thinking that there is a panacea in Qt and other kits. What most of
these "cross-platform" kits provide is a (sometimes thin) wrapper
around native OS GUI API. In many cases, you not only have to learn
the wrapper, but when you get stuck, you still need to know a bit
about what's going on under the hood. This is partially a result of
the inextricable awkwardness of underlying GUI architecture on
Windows. Note that the SDK for Qt for Windows is 178MB. The one for
Mac is 0.5GB.

Since you will be doing neural networks, you undoubtely want to draw
your own nets. In that case, I think your ideal combination will the
the compiler above, plus a no-nonsense C++ graphics library that
already comes with Windows, GDI+. IMO, the author of this libary did a
very good job of thinking first, then doing, whereas some of the other
frameworks seem to have grown organically. You will have a slight
learning curve just to get the window up on the screen and process
messages, but once you have done that, you can quickly move to the
part that matters: GDI+.

References:

http://www.microsoft.com/exPress/
http://qt.nokia.com/downloads
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms534427(VS.85).aspx

-Le Chaud Lapin-


--
[ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]
[ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]

First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Using Boost.Spirit in production code
Next: Arguement against NULLing a pointer after delete?