Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

> Different order of c compiler for xharbour by xailer > http://xailer.info/esp/?p=179 Few more points to make after reading the article in translator: - They ranked Pelles C the first, but they forgot to measure execution speed. - In the article they worry about MSVC being abandoned as free

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

> Different order of c compiler for xharbour by xailer > http://xailer.info/esp/?p=179 It's not that much different, only that they seem to rank Pelles C higher than us. Pelles C is good in features, easy to use, but it's full of serious bugs (and nobody's bug reports were answered since last

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Different order of c compiler for xharbour by xailer http://xailer.info/esp/?p=179 Embarcadero is working to 64 bit borland c++ http://edn.embarcadero.com/article/39174 2010/3/9 Maurilio Longo : > Hi, > > which is the harbour recommended C compiler for the windows platform? > > best regards. >

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Hi, ../../../sddfb.c: In function ‘fbDisconnect’: ../../../sddfb.c:181:4: warning: dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules ../../../sddfb.c: In function ‘fbOpen’: ../../../sddfb.c:209:4: warning: dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules ../

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

>> Finally I installed for tests GCC 4.5 (devel version) >> and in C++ mode with -flto it gives also better results >> then in C mode so it's potentially the fastest code. >> I have to say that I vary like how the meta code is >> implemented. Unlike other compilers GCC can be used >> with LTO witho

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

On Sat, 13 Mar 2010, Szak�ts Viktor wrote: > Fixed: > 2010-03-13 03:18 UTC+0100 Viktor Szakats Thank you very much. So it was stupid typo which exploited the same problem as in few 32bit MinGW builds I tested. MAIN() in linked code enables automatically console application. best regards, Przeme

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Fixed: 2010-03-13 03:18 UTC+0100 Viktor Szakats Brgds, Viktor On 2010 Mar 12, at 15:21, Viktor Szakáts wrote: > Hi, > >>> hbmk2 behaves the exact same for mingw and mingw64, >>> yet it doesn't work for mingw64 and does for mingw. >> >> This problem was exploited in different MINGW version.

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Hi, >> hbmk2 behaves the exact same for mingw and mingw64, >> yet it doesn't work for mingw64 and does for mingw. > > This problem was exploited in different MINGW version. > Not in all ones. > Seems that now HBMK2 is tuned only for some chosen MinGW > versions. There is nothing special done fo

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Przemyslaw, could this issue explain some of my troubles the other day? Maurilio. -- __ | | | |__| Maurilio Longo |_|_|_|| farmaconsult s.r.l.  ___ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http:

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

On Fri, 12 Mar 2010, Szak�ts Viktor wrote: Hi, > hbmk2 behaves the exact same for mingw and mingw64, > yet it doesn't work for mingw64 and does for mingw. This problem was exploited in different MINGW version. Not in all ones. Seems that now HBMK2 is tuned only for some chosen MinGW versions.

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Hi, >> The only so far known problem is ignored -mwindows >> option when using mingw64 4.4.4, so app doesn't >> pop with GTWVT, with GTWIN it runs beautifully. >> I'm not sure if the problem is with Harbour or >> mingw64. > > It sounds like an old issue. > If main() function is found in linke

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

On Fri, 12 Mar 2010, Szak�ts Viktor wrote: Hi, > The only so far known problem is ignored -mwindows > option when using mingw64 4.4.4, so app doesn't > pop with GTWVT, with GTWIN it runs beautifully. > I'm not sure if the problem is with Harbour or > mingw64. It sounds like an old issue. If

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Hi, >> Results in 64-bit mode using MSVC 2008 (same as 32-bit) >> and mingw 4.4.4 20100129 (prerelease): >> mingw msvc >> C++ 11.63 >> C11.08 >> mingw seems to be the winner here in default >> Harbour builds, even though msvc had the advantage >> of C++ mode. > > Finally I ins

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

On Thu, 11 Mar 2010, Szak�ts Viktor wrote: Hi, > Results in 64-bit mode using MSVC 2008 (same as 32-bit) > and mingw 4.4.4 20100129 (prerelease): > mingw msvc > C++ 11.63 > C11.08 > mingw seems to be the winner here in default > Harbour builds, even though msvc had the advanta

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Hi, > Borland allow function to be replaceable so you can replace a single > function without replace entire module > not good way but can be easy: > > in my.lib other than other function > func stato > will be replaced > in myprg with simply > func stato > sequence link define result There i

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Borland allow function to be replaceable so you can replace a single function without replace entire module not good way but can be easy: in my.lib other than other function func stato will be replaced in myprg with simply func stato sequence link define result 2010/3/9 Maurilio Longo > Hi, > >

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Results in 64-bit mode using MSVC 2008 (same as 32-bit) and mingw 4.4.4 20100129 (prerelease): mingw msvc C++ 11.63 C11.08 mingw seems to be the winner here in default Harbour builds, even though msvc had the advantage of C++ mode. Plus, 64-bit mode has a clear advantage ove

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

BTW, here is the full result matrix for mingw 4.4.1 and MSVC 2008: mingwmsvc C++ 13.57 *13.59 C *14.2713.76 (* is default build mode in Harbour) This means that in C++ mode msvc and mingw are very close, in C mode msvc still leads, and in default Harbour builds, msvc also lea

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Hi, > It's similar to mine results. > GCC4 in C++ mode for sure uses more extensively strict aliasing > optimization. At least it was reporting more errors and warnings > for Harbour core code which was using casting ignoring aliasing > rules. Maybe we should switch to C++ as default for mingw o

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Official MinGW installation reminds me of the old Xvid.org site before its new website... so back around in the pre-2007 years... Also reminds me of how annoying installing and using Cygwin can be. Interesting thread! 2010/3/10 Przemysław Czerpak > On Wed, 10 Mar 2010, Szak�ts Viktor wrote: >

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

On Wed, 10 Mar 2010, Szak�ts Viktor wrote: Hi, > > It's interesting to check if there are any speed differences in MSVC C and > > C++ builds. > > Can you check it? > I checked mingw-tdm-2 4.4.1, and C++ turned out to be consistently > faster by 5% than plain C. Calculated by 4-4 speedtst runs, d

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Hi, >> Is it also true that C++ mode enhances speed for >> x86 code? I see it slightly does for x86_64. > > I do not know. In general C++ mode is a little bit more restrictive then > pure C so it's possible that some compilers which want to keep strict C > standards do not make some optimization

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Viktor, What do you think about changing the INSTALL file where it says: Tools: ... GNU Make Windows binary + source: http://sourceforge.net/projects/mingw/files/MinGW%20make And put: http://www.tdragon.net/recentgcc/ instead (or as an option)? Just a humble sugg

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Hi, It was very simple for me. Maybe I was a lucky "sailor in the first voyage"? >>> No, I have the same experience: I just run the mingw installer, the >>> msys installer, get gd, zlib, openssl from gnuwin32 and run the >>> installers, get eclipse and git and run the installers, get po

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Hi Qatan, >> Just don't be mistaken by the misleading versioning of >> "mingw" here, 5.1.6 has nothing to do with the gcc version >> which the distro is based on, it's their own numbering >> (similar to cygwin (1.7) and djgpp (2.04b) verison). > > Thanks for the nice explanation. It brings ligh

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

On Wed, 10 Mar 2010, Szak�ts Viktor wrote: Hi, > >> It was very simple for me. Maybe I was a lucky "sailor in the first > >> voyage"? > > No, I have the same experience: I just run the mingw installer, the > > msys installer, get gd, zlib, openssl from gnuwin32 and run the > > installers, get ec

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Hi Lorenzo, > On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 7:11 PM, Qatan wrote: > >> It was very simple for me. Maybe I was a lucky "sailor in the first voyage"? > > No, I have the same experience: I just run the mingw installer, the > msys installer, get gd, zlib, openssl from gnuwin32 and run the > installers, g

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Viktor, Just don't be mistaken by the misleading versioning of "mingw" here, 5.1.6 has nothing to do with the gcc version which the distro is based on, it's their own numbering (similar to cygwin (1.7) and djgpp (2.04b) verison). Thanks for the nice explanation. It brings light for us to u

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

> reading version 5.2 i think to a new version of gcc that is 4.4.1 (afaik > dwarf) > http://nuwen.net/mingw.html#about This is another binary distro with yet another package versioning scheme. 5.2 cannot be compared to mingw official package version numbering. Also DWARF support is not connec

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

On Wed, 10 Mar 2010, Szak�ts Viktor wrote: Hi, > Is it also true that C++ mode enhances speed for > x86 code? I see it slightly does for x86_64. I do not know. In general C++ mode is a little bit more restrictive then pure C so it's possible that some compilers which want to keep strict C stand

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Hi, On 2010 Mar 10, at 19:11, Qatan wrote: > Maurilio, > >> PS. I've installed dragon media, smartsvn and I was able to build harbour >> on >> win32 very smoothly. >> >> Maurilio. > > Just to share my humble experience I've installed "MingW-5.1.6", > "TortoiseSVN-1.6.7.18415-win32-svn-1.6.9.",

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

reading version 5.2 i think to a new version of gcc that is 4.4.1 (afaik dwarf) http://nuwen.net/mingw.html#about Instead http://www.tdragon.net/recentgcc/ use a updated .4.4.1 TDM-2 2010/3/10 Lorenzo Fiorini > On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 7:11 PM, Qatan wrote: >

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 7:11 PM, Qatan wrote: > It was very simple for me. Maybe I was a lucky "sailor in the first voyage"? No, I have the same experience: I just run the mingw installer, the msys installer, get gd, zlib, openssl from gnuwin32 and run the installers, get eclipse and git and run

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Maurilio, PS. I've installed dragon media, smartsvn and I was able to build harbour on win32 very smoothly. Maurilio. Just to share my humble experience I've installed "MingW-5.1.6", "TortoiseSVN-1.6.7.18415-win32-svn-1.6.9.", "UPX-304w" without any problems and I was able to build harbour fr

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Hi Przemek, Is it also true that C++ mode enhances speed for x86 code? I see it slightly does for x86_64. Brgds, Viktor On 2010 Mar 10, at 16:43, Przemysław Czerpak wrote: > On Wed, 10 Mar 2010, francesco perillo wrote: > > Hi, > >>> BCC is a joke these days. >> ooops... I have a production

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

On Wed, 10 Mar 2010, francesco perillo wrote: Hi, > > BCC is a joke these days. > ooops... I have a production site working with a bbc version of Harbour... It works but it's not very good choice. There are some very serious bugs in BCC but for the ones known for us we have workarounds, i.e. we

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

>> BCC is a joke these days. > > ooops... I have a production site working with a bbc version of Harbour... Well, it does work, it just has limited capabilities compared to other compilers. If you don't need those capabilities, you might be okay with bcc. Though at least if runtime speed is a

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

> BCC is a joke these days. ooops... I have a production site working with a bbc version of Harbour... ___ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

> Personal observation: > * MINGW is the fastest though it has larger executable ( does not matter > ). MSVC is the fastest, closely followed by MINGW. > * MINGW has the limitation not to allow more than 1 resource files ( > really a shame ). This is not true. > * MINGW is very tricky whe

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

I remember an intresting pritpal posting Here are some results of 3 compilers: MSVC 2008 EXE SIZE: 6573 KB DIFFERENCE: Links one external lib statically ( www.dosadi.com ) RUN: PASS16.75 Secs PASS24.97 Secs PASS35.00 Secs BCC 5.5.1 EXE SIZE: 6706 KB

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Hi Maurilio, > Viktor, > > if I read it correctly a dwarf2 .exe which loads a .dll which has an exception > inside itself cannot work, since you're traversing a stack frame which > receives an exception from windows. Am I right? I don't have academic answer for the unwinding topic, so locally I

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Viktor, if I read it correctly a dwarf2 .exe which loads a .dll which has an exception inside itself cannot work, since you're traversing a stack frame which receives an exception from windows. Am I right? Maurilio. PS. I've installed dragon media, smartsvn and I was able to build harbour on win

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Hi Maurilio, > I had the same impression about mingw being a nightmare to install and make it > work. > > I'll try dragon media :) > > One more question, for harbour should I use sjlj unwinding or dwarf2? It only matters if you want to use HBQT. For 4.5.x you need SJLJ, for 4.6.x you need DWAR

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Viktor, I had the same impression about mingw being a nightmare to install and make it work. I'll try dragon media :) One more question, for harbour should I use sjlj unwinding or dwarf2? Thanks. Maurilio. Viktor Szakáts wrote: > Hi Maurilio, > >> what are the differences between mingw and

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Hi Maurilio, > what are the differences between mingw and dragon media? tdragon release is easy to setup/install, while mingw is extremely time-consuming and frustrating experience (and it doesn't get any better with newer versions). tdragon was also more agile in releasing usable packages (no

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

TDM just released a newer version of GCC, while the official MingW site releases and old version of GCC from the 3.x.x branch. TDM is 4.4.1 currently. On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 3:52 AM, Maurilio Longo wrote: > Smu, > > what are the differences between mingw and dragon media? > > Maurilio. > > smu j

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Smu, what are the differences between mingw and dragon media? Maurilio. smu johnson wrote: > It should be stated that the best one might be the one Harbour uses, > which is not the official MinGW release, but Twilight Dragon Media's > release, which is a build of a newer version of MinGW GCC. >

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

It should be stated that the best one might be the one Harbour uses, which is not the official MinGW release, but Twilight Dragon Media's release, which is a build of a newer version of MinGW GCC. On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 2:05 AM, Viktor Szakáts wrote: > > is mingw able to create stand-alone .EXEs

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

> is mingw able to create stand-alone .EXEs and or .DLLs or does it require to > deliver some runtime code with them? mingw in context of Harbour requires only standard msvcrt.dll. (hbqt additionally requires mingwm10.dll, but it's an "issue" with QT) Brgds, Viktor

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Viktor, is mingw able to create stand-alone .EXEs and or .DLLs or does it require to deliver some runtime code with them? Best regards. Maurilio. Viktor Szakáts wrote: > Hi, > >> which is the harbour recommended C compiler for the windows platform? > > mingw (4.4), or msvc (2005 or upper). >

Re: [Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Hi, > which is the harbour recommended C compiler for the windows platform? mingw (4.4), or msvc (2005 or upper). [ these msvc versions don't support Win9x, if that's a concern. ] Brgds, Viktor ___ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) H

[Harbour] recommended C compiler for Win

Hi, which is the harbour recommended C compiler for the windows platform? best regards. -- __ | | | |__| Maurilio Longo |_|_|_|| farmaconsult s.r.l.  ___ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org h