gcc 3.4.6 as compiler and mcedit + bash as ide, on linux, for C and C++
microsoft visual studio 2005 professional edition on windows (for C, C++, C#)
lcc on win98 at home (just for FUN :D)
What edition of the C Compiler do you use?
C in windows I use lcc, for linux I use gcc. With that being said I rarely use C anymore as I find it's quite archaic and much prefer interpreted/JIT languages
at home (C/C++ only):
* compiler: gcc 4.1, will upgrade to 4.2 as soon as I have finished some important todo here at home (4.2 implements the OpenMP standard, called "gomp" there, yay :D)
* then for writing either I use Anjuta (an ide), SciTE (an editor, based on Scintilla (like Anjuta's editor)), or "directly" vi (a mighty editor)
at work:
* Code::Blocks (IDE) or Notepad++ (again: based on Scintilla) with MinGW (gcc version 3.4.2 afar)
in school:
* Borland C++ (dunno which version, but an older one) => <disclaimer> I HATE IT. I have never seen such an proprietary ***** ** ****. Not the IDE itself is what makes me angry, but how they pop in their own standards there (It's hard from time to time if you want to se good old sprintf or so, and than have to struggle with the builtin string object and conversion and so...)
edit: oh, just recognized we're talking C only here, stripped Delphi away...
* compiler: gcc 4.1, will upgrade to 4.2 as soon as I have finished some important todo here at home (4.2 implements the OpenMP standard, called "gomp" there, yay :D)
* then for writing either I use Anjuta (an ide), SciTE (an editor, based on Scintilla (like Anjuta's editor)), or "directly" vi (a mighty editor)
at work:
* Code::Blocks (IDE) or Notepad++ (again: based on Scintilla) with MinGW (gcc version 3.4.2 afar)
in school:
* Borland C++ (dunno which version, but an older one) => <disclaimer> I HATE IT. I have never seen such an proprietary ***** ** ****. Not the IDE itself is what makes me angry, but how they pop in their own standards there (It's hard from time to time if you want to se good old sprintf or so, and than have to struggle with the builtin string object and conversion and so...)
edit: oh, just recognized we're talking C only here, stripped Delphi away...
I used VS2005 Express and now use VS Orcas Beta 1 Professional.
I also compile my code in MinGW with gcc 4.1.1 wich I compiled myself because MinGW only comes with gcc 3.4.6 the last time I checked.
Compiling my code with both VS and GCC makes it more standards compliant! I've run into several problems with the use of templates where visual studio allowed code that gcc wouldn't compile. So compiling with both makes my code more robust.
I also compile my code in MinGW with gcc 4.1.1 wich I compiled myself because MinGW only comes with gcc 3.4.6 the last time I checked.
Compiling my code with both VS and GCC makes it more standards compliant! I've run into several problems with the use of templates where visual studio allowed code that gcc wouldn't compile. So compiling with both makes my code more robust.
Visual Studio 2005 pro
TurboC 2.1, Alot of people on forums use this (Believe it or not), so...
Djgpp w/ gcc and ld/ld-elf
TurboC 2.1, Alot of people on forums use this (Believe it or not), so...
Djgpp w/ gcc and ld/ld-elf
Borland C++ -- No (old)
Visual C++ 6 -- No (not a C++ compiler)
Visual C++ .Net 2003 -- No (old)
Visual C++ .Net 2005 -- Yes (recent)
Visual C# 2003 -- No (old)
Visual C# 2005 -- Yes (recent)
QFE
Visual C++ 6 -- No (not a C++ compiler)
Visual C++ .Net 2003 -- No (old)
Visual C++ .Net 2005 -- Yes (recent)
Visual C# 2003 -- No (old)
Visual C# 2005 -- Yes (recent)
Quote:Original post by Driv3MeFar
None of those are, strictly speaking, C compilers.
QFE
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement