flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

Index > Heap > Best C Compiler (no C++/IDE)

Goto page 1, 2  Next
Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
wfox



Joined: 17 Apr 2006
Posts: 3
wfox
What C Compiler is the best and why? (no C++ compiler or IDE).
Sorry for my english.
Post 12 May 2006, 02:56
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
KRA



Joined: 14 Jun 2005
Posts: 24
KRA
I would sugest the TCC ( Tiny C Compiler) it's much faster than GCC and you can actually use C files as scripts with it.
Post 12 May 2006, 07:05
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
HyperVista



Joined: 18 Apr 2005
Posts: 691
Location: Virginia, USA
HyperVista
Greetings wfox - not sure why you insist on no C++ compile or IDE, but you may want to check out his link of available free c and c++ compilers and a description of each. Hope this is helpful to you.

http://www.thefreecountry.com/compilers/cpp.shtml
Post 12 May 2006, 13:44
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
f0dder



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 3170
Location: Denmark
f0dder
The best C compiler will probably also be the best C++ compiler, these days... depending on how you define "best".

If you go for language conformity and code generation, Visual C++ from Microsoft (vc2003 or vc2005) is probably the best - and freely available Microsoft stopped distributing the vc2003 toolkit, but it can still be found other places. And you can get Visual C++ 2005 Express, but that's a large download just to get the compiler.

Intel's C++ compiler is also VERY good, and sometimes generates better code than the Microsoft compiler... but it's not available for free.

GCC is okay; worse code generation than MS and Intel, but still pretty language conforming. Unfortunately GCC4 isn't included in the MingW distribution yet.

Digital Mars also seems decent,but I haven't used it for some years. Unfortunately they choose to use OMF object files instead of COFF.
Post 12 May 2006, 14:25
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
OzzY



Joined: 19 Sep 2003
Posts: 1029
Location: Everywhere
OzzY
For C only compiler try Pelles C. ( http://www.smorgasbordet.com/pellesc/ )
It follows the same standards and optimizations of MS VC++ 2005, but it's freeware.
Also comes with nice IDE, but you can use it from command line.
For C++ there's MS VC++ 2003 toolkit, also freeware.

For better compatibility between win and linux you can user GCC on both (Mingw and GCC). This follows the ISO standards and is available for lots of platforms, plus it's easy to find opensource libraries for this.
Post 12 May 2006, 14:38
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Ivan2k2



Joined: 08 Sep 2004
Posts: 80
Location: Russia, Angarsk
Ivan2k2
hi all

i personally like openwatcom and mingw compilers, both are free and opensource, and both in SOME cases are faster then vc200x or even intelc++.
Post 12 May 2006, 15:02
View user's profile Send private message ICQ Number Reply with quote
f0dder



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 3170
Location: Denmark
f0dder
Quote:

For C++ there's MS VC++ 2003 toolkit, also freeware.

Not available from MS anymore though, you have to find it at a third-party site Sad

Quote:

For better compatibility between win and linux you can user GCC on both (Mingw and GCC). This follows the ISO standards and is available for lots of platforms, plus it's easy to find opensource libraries for this.

GCC 3.x (which is what MingW offers) is somewhat less standards-compliant than VC2003, though... not that it'll matter to most people, though.

How does Pelle's C code generation compare to VC2003?
Post 12 May 2006, 15:17
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
OzzY



Joined: 19 Sep 2003
Posts: 1029
Location: Everywhere
OzzY
I think Pelles C does even a better job at optimizing the code to build very tiny EXE's and also fast code.
It includes: C (C only, no c++) compiler, *very* optimizing linker (with merge sections support), very usefull IDE, great message board, plus more...
It is 100% compatible with VC2003 (command line to pass to compiler/linker, libraries 100% compatible, import VC2003 project, etc), plus it support the latest C standards!
It compiles to Windows and Pocket PC, and have an assembler for both.

Nothing more to say... see for yourself: http://www.smorgasbordet.com/pellesc/

The only drawback: I wish it was more used by programmers, because it's like a free Visual Studio clone for C-only programming. I think it deserves more atention, cause Pelle is doing a great job there.
I think the best tools available for coding are FASM and Pelles C (no kidding... they beat even comercial tools).

OzzY
Post 12 May 2006, 18:52
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
rugxulo



Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 2341
Location: Usono (aka, USA)
rugxulo
targets Windows and DOS
OpenWatcom 1.6
CC386 3.27

targets DOS (needs RSX/NT for Win32?)
DJGPP 2.03p2 (GCC 4.1.0)

targets Windows and DOS but runs only on Windows
Digital Mars 8.49
Borland C++ Builder 5.5 (needs WDOSX for DOS)


Last edited by rugxulo on 28 Dec 2006, 20:26; edited 2 times in total
Post 14 May 2006, 02:48
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
f0dder



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 3170
Location: Denmark
f0dder
Quote:

I think Pelles C does even a better job at optimizing the code to build very tiny EXE's and also fast code. It includes: C (C only, no c++) compiler, *very* optimizing linker (with merge sections support), very usefull IDE, great message board, plus more...

I could care less about tiny EXE's, I can already get that with VC200x - code generation is the most important factor for me, and somehow I have my doubts that something LCC-based will beat VC200x, even though Pelle *is* a decent programmer Smile

But I guess I'll have to do some benchmarks and check.

I'd stay away from Borland C++ Builder, it's notorious for bad code generation and overbloated libc (last time I checked, it seemed that printf was implemented in terms of C++ iostreams == ├╝berbloated EXEs).
Post 14 May 2006, 07:49
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Tommy



Joined: 17 Jun 2003
Posts: 489
Location: Norway
Tommy
VC200x does a better job on code generation, that's true. Pelle is a decent programmer, as you say, but the LCC-base is preventing him from making it as optimal as we maybe wish for... This is at least the case for what I've been tested... The fact that Pelle C's generating smaller executables isn't a proof of better code generation.

Though, I think Pelle has done a great job with his tool-set, and I admire his work.
Post 14 May 2006, 07:59
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
f0dder



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 3170
Location: Denmark
f0dder
Quote:

Though, I think Pelle has done a great job with his tool-set, and I admire his work.

Indeed, especially having a free alternative to MS link that supports the industry-standard object and library formats is pretty nice... and poasm might also show to be valuable.
Post 14 May 2006, 08:11
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
OzzY



Joined: 19 Sep 2003
Posts: 1029
Location: Everywhere
OzzY
Has anyone tried watcom?
It seems it was the best compiler years ago in DOS days.
It's now open source and released as Open Watcom. Is it an optimizing compiler comparing to current standards (VC++, Mingw,...)?
Post 14 May 2006, 19:58
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
f0dder



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 3170
Location: Denmark
f0dder
It's somewhat lacking in C++ support - it doesn't come with it's own STL, and iirc you need some hacks to get STLPort working with it. I also doubt it has as good code generation as VC++ and Intel's C++ compiler since it was abandoned for some years before it was opensourced.

But the Watcom suite is still pretty powerful, it supports a lot of file formats etc. Never used the assembler much, so dunno how powerful that is. But worth a look nonetheless Smile
Post 14 May 2006, 21:32
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
rugxulo



Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 2341
Location: Usono (aka, USA)
rugxulo
Haven't tested OpenWatcom 1.5 yet, but it's certainly worth the money. Very Happy

In 1.4, they added a real-mode assembler that uses less memory (WASMR) plus beta assemblers for other architectures like PowerPC and Alpha AXP (WASPPC 0.3, WASAXP 0.8 ). I think the assembler only supports a subset of MASM, to say the least.

But, it ain't the worst ever. Anyways, can't say much else overall since I haven't really done anything with it.

Go ahead and download it: that's the only way to test it for sure. Then, come back here and post your opinions. Razz
Post 16 May 2006, 23:52
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Chewy509



Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Posts: 297
Location: Bris-vegas, Australia
Chewy509
f0dder wrote:
Quote:

For C++ there's MS VC++ 2003 toolkit, also freeware.

Not available from MS anymore though, you have to find it at a third-party site Sad

If anyone want's a copy, just PM me and I can upload it for you (it's 33MB) to your choice of server.
Post 17 May 2006, 03:08
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
f0dder



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 3170
Location: Denmark
f0dder
Quote:

If anyone want's a copy, just PM me and I can upload it for you (it's 33MB) to your choice of server.

Shouldn't be necessary, as long as you can find other download alternatives with google Smile
Post 17 May 2006, 09:02
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
OzzY



Joined: 19 Sep 2003
Posts: 1029
Location: Everywhere
OzzY
Quote:
For C++ there's MS VC++ 2003 toolkit, also freeware.


Not available from MS anymore though, you have to find it at a third-party site

That's why I burned it to a CD-R! Very Happy
I knew that Micro$oft free stuff could'nt last much time!
I'm doing the same for the Express editions and burning all to CD! Razz

You could get the 2005 Express, as it's also free and comes with the IDE. Also, you can install it, get the compiler and remove the IDE and other things you don't need...
Post 17 May 2006, 14:01
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
f0dder



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 3170
Location: Denmark
f0dder
Quote:

You could get the 2005 Express, as it's also free and comes with the IDE. Also, you can install it, get the compiler and remove the IDE and other things you don't need...

Too bad for people who are on dialup Smile - and annoying that you have to download & install so much that you might not need.

Oh well, it's free and it's a good compiler, with full optimization.
Post 17 May 2006, 15:18
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
rugxulo



Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 2341
Location: Usono (aka, USA)
rugxulo
Well, what is the answer for large downloads? I'll take a guess:

  • better compressor (don't use .ZIP or .GZ): UHarc, 7-Zip. Bzip2
  • optional packages (don't force users to download everything in one lump)
  • optional docs (don't include 12 meg .HLP just for completeness' sake, don't include all 50 help doc formats)
  • less glitz, more functionality (use TUI if it's quicker, cleaner, faster, smaller)
  • separate the source from binary (if possible; make an uncommented src available only for building and not for studying/modifying)
  • post Diff output updates instead of requiring a complete download of everything (if possible; yes, this would require the following ...)
  • (only as a last resort) rely on third-party tools as much as possible (eek!)


P.S. Yes, even OpenWatcom is no longer available like it was in 1.3 (where you only had to download certain .ZIPs). Now, you have to grab the whole 59 MB .EXE/.ZIPsfx (although at least the Fortran download is separate from the C/C++).

EDIT: Arkady V. Belousov has made it available as separate .ZIPs, so you don't have to download the whole thing (see next page for URL).


Last edited by rugxulo on 28 Dec 2006, 20:29; edited 1 time in total
Post 17 May 2006, 22:50
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  
Goto page 1, 2  Next

< Last Thread | Next Thread >
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Copyright © 1999-2020, Tomasz Grysztar.

Powered by rwasa.