Which is the best C++ compiler for Windows ?

[madhu.mys@gmail.com]

Hi,
According to you, Which is the best C++ compiler for windows ?
Which compiler is least buggy and generate Optimized code ?

[Ivan Vecerina]

Re: Which is the best C++ compiler for Windows ?

<madhu.mys@gmai l.com> wrote in message
news:1110320178 .937994.50520@z 14g2000cwz.goog legroups.com...[color=blue]
> According to you, Which is the best C++ compiler for windows ?
> Which compiler is least buggy and generate Optimized code ?[/color]
It depends...
Microsoft's MSVC >7.0 is pretty standards compliant, it
is fast, and generates nicely optimized code. Also, it is
in widespread use (although many still use version 6.x...).
And you can get it for free...

Intel's compiler is very good in terms of language compliance
and often generates the fastest code. However, it is not free,
and is relatively slower.

GCC/MingW is open source. Generates well optimized code,
has quite good standards compliance. It can also be
quite convenient when writing/porting cross-platform
code.

Borland's C++ comes with its own extensions, and integrates
with other Borland tools (Delphi, ...). Also available
on Linux...

Metrowerks' C++ compiler supports a large number of platforms,
also offers a nice environment; also is fast and generates
efficient code...

There's also Comeau, wich might still be the most
standard-compliant C++ compiler, also available on
a very large number of platforms.

Then there is Digital Mars, and probably others that I
just can't think of right now...


So what exactly are you looking for in your compiler?


Ivan
--
http://ivan.vecerina.com/contact/?subject=NG_POST <- email contact form
Brainbench MVP for C++ <> http://www.brainbench.com

[Victor Bazarov]

Re: Which is the best C++ compiler for Windows ?

Ivan Vecerina wrote:[color=blue]
> <madhu.mys@gmai l.com> wrote in message
> news:1110320178 .937994.50520@z 14g2000cwz.goog legroups.com...
>[color=green]
>>According to you, Which is the best C++ compiler for windows ?
>>Which compiler is least buggy and generate Optimized code ?[/color]
>
> It depends...
> Microsoft's MSVC >7.0 is pretty standards compliant, it
> is fast, and generates nicely optimized code. Also, it is
> in widespread use (although many still use version 6.x...).
> And you can get it for free...[/color]

To alleviate any possible confusion, it's the compiler that is free,
not the development environment. And it's the development environment
that is in widespread use (along with the compiler).
[color=blue]
> Intel's compiler is very good in terms of language compliance
> and often generates the fastest code. However, it is not free,
> and is relatively slower.[/color]

Has no environment. Integrates with MSVC's one.
[color=blue]
> GCC/MingW is open source. Generates well optimized code,
> has quite good standards compliance. It can also be
> quite convenient when writing/porting cross-platform
> code.[/color]

You're making it sound that others aren't. What you ought to say is
that is has quite a few extensions often used in Linux/Un*x code. The
extensions on Windows are, of course, the same with MinGW.
[color=blue]
> Borland's C++ comes with its own extensions, and integrates
> with other Borland tools (Delphi, ...). Also available
> on Linux...[/color]

And it's not cheap there, IIRC.
[color=blue]
> Metrowerks' C++ compiler supports a large number of platforms,
> also offers a nice environment; also is fast and generates
> efficient code...[/color]

Last time I looked it was behind everybody in Standard compliance.
[color=blue]
> There's also Comeau, wich might still be the most
> standard-compliant C++ compiler, also available on
> a very large number of platforms.[/color]

Unfortunately, it requires a C compiler to get the final result. It's
essentially a front end. Not that it's a bad thing...

V

[Greg Comeau]

Re: Which is the best C++ compiler for Windows ?

In article <33rXd.51336$NC 6.9234@newsread 1.mlpsca01.us.t o.verio.net>,
Victor Bazarov <v.Abazarov@com Acast.net> wrote:[color=blue]
>Ivan Vecerina wrote:[color=green]
>> There's also Comeau, wich might still be the most
>> standard-compliant C++ compiler, also available on
>> a very large number of platforms.[/color]
>
>Unfortunatel y, it requires a C compiler to get the final result. It's
>essentially a front end. Not that it's a bad thing...[/color]

Therefore not unfortunate :) as most customers will either have
the required C compiler already (say with Comeau C++ for LINUX)
can download most supported compilers for free (Borland,
Digital Mars, lcc, MinGW, etc) and/or add others that are
supported, can be brought to market quicker and in
multi-platform versions, customized by Comeau for embedded
systems and proprietary uses, etc. all while being able to
be compliant, many modes, etc.
--
Greg Comeau / Comeau for the Mac? Stay tuned.
Comeau C/C++ ONLINE ==> http://www.comeaucomputing.com/tryitout
World Class Compilers: Breathtaking C++, Amazing C99, Fabulous C90.
Comeau C/C++ with Dinkumware's Libraries... Have you tried it?

[Ivan Vecerina]

Re: Which is the best C++ compiler for Windows ?

"Victor Bazarov" <v.Abazarov@com Acast.net> wrote in message
news:33rXd.5133 6$NC6.9234@news read1.mlpsca01. us.to.verio.net ...[color=blue]
> Ivan Vecerina wrote:[color=green]
>> Borland's C++ comes with its own extensions, and integrates
>> with other Borland tools (Delphi, ...). Also available
>> on Linux...[/color]
>
> And it's not cheap there, IIRC.[/color]
Actually free: http://www.borland.com/kylix/open/index.html

For a list of compilers one could also check:

http://www.thefreecountry.com/compilers/cpp.shtml

Anyway, the real point is that the best compier depends on the
type of development you are doing.
If you live in a Microsoft-only world, you may probably just
stick with their tools/compiler(s), especially as you can get
various versions of it for free.

With an extra budget and extreme need for performance,
the intel C++ compiler could be explored as an addition.

But if standard C++ or portability to some other platforms
is in the picture, using another compiler - and even routinely
making builds with more than one compiler - should be considered.


--
http://ivan.vecerina.com/contact/?subject=NG_POST <- email contact form

[Mike Smith]

Re: Which is the best C++ compiler for Windows ?

Victor Bazarov wrote:
[color=blue]
> Ivan Vecerina wrote:
>[color=green]
>> <madhu.mys@gmai l.com> wrote in message
>> news:1110320178 .937994.50520@z 14g2000cwz.goog legroups.com...
>>[color=darkred]
>>> According to you, Which is the best C++ compiler for windows ?
>>> Which compiler is least buggy and generate Optimized code ?[/color]
>>
>>
>> It depends...
>> Microsoft's MSVC >7.0 is pretty standards compliant, it
>> is fast, and generates nicely optimized code. Also, it is
>> in widespread use (although many still use version 6.x...).
>> And you can get it for free...[/color]
>
>
> To alleviate any possible confusion, it's the compiler that is free,
> not the development environment. And it's the development environment
> that is in widespread use (along with the compiler).[/color]

True, although it is my understanding (haven't got around to trying it)
that it is possible to get the free 2003 compiler to work with the
(currently free) Visual Studio 2005 Express IDE for C++.

--
Mike Smith

[Victor Bazarov]

Re: Which is the best C++ compiler for Windows ?

Mike Smith wrote:[color=blue]
> Victor Bazarov wrote:
>[color=green]
>> Ivan Vecerina wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> <madhu.mys@gmai l.com> wrote in message
>>> news:1110320178 .937994.50520@z 14g2000cwz.goog legroups.com...
>>>
>>>> According to you, Which is the best C++ compiler for windows ?
>>>> Which compiler is least buggy and generate Optimized code ?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It depends...
>>> Microsoft's MSVC >7.0 is pretty standards compliant, it
>>> is fast, and generates nicely optimized code. Also, it is
>>> in widespread use (although many still use version 6.x...).
>>> And you can get it for free...[/color]
>>
>>
>>
>> To alleviate any possible confusion, it's the compiler that is free,
>> not the development environment. And it's the development environment
>> that is in widespread use (along with the compiler).[/color]
>
>
> True, although it is my understanding (haven't got around to trying it)
> that it is possible to get the free 2003 compiler to work with the
> (currently free) Visual Studio 2005 Express IDE for C++.[/color]

It's probably possible. It also must be possible to make it work with
other products like Dev-C++ or emacs or any other editor that supports
and provides compiler invocation. I'm yet to meet anybody who would do
that. Professionally.

V

[Mike Smith]

Re: Which is the best C++ compiler for Windows ?

Victor Bazarov wrote:
[color=blue]
> Mike Smith wrote:[color=green]
>>
>> True, although it is my understanding (haven't got around to trying
>> it) that it is possible to get the free 2003 compiler to work with the
>> (currently free) Visual Studio 2005 Express IDE for C++.[/color]
>
> It's probably possible. It also must be possible to make it work with
> other products like Dev-C++ or emacs or any other editor that supports
> and provides compiler invocation. I'm yet to meet anybody who would do
> that. Professionally.[/color]

"who would do that"? You make it sound like a crime. Granted, I
wouldn't try to build production code that way, but maybe the OP's not
interested in that.

--
Mike Smith

[DHOLLINGSWORTH2]

Re: Which is the best C++ compiler for Windows ?


"Mike Smith" <mike_UNDERSCOR E_smith@acm.DOT .org> wrote in message
news:1133qhsh4d u8o1f@news.supe rnews.com...[color=blue]
> Victor Bazarov wrote:
>[color=green]
>> Mike Smith wrote:[color=darkred]
>>>
>>> True, although it is my understanding (haven't got around to trying it)
>>> that it is possible to get the free 2003 compiler to work with the
>>> (currently free) Visual Studio 2005 Express IDE for C++.[/color]
>>
>> It's probably possible. It also must be possible to make it work with[/color][/color]

It's definately possible.
The problem is this, they both try to write config info to the Registry, So
they do not act Dissimilar.

However, I think you'd do better either neglecting the Beta, or jumping
straight to the Release.