Miscellaneous > Programming & Networking

Alternative Visual studio

(1/2) > >>

thra5h3r:
HI, I was wonderinf I could get hold of a free replacement of Visual Studio. Or could someone point me in the direction of a programming language that can be used in all OSs (exlucding DOS).

Thanx

voidmain:
C and C++ can be used on most OSs. There is a great free compiler called GCC which has been ported to most popular OSs (including DOS/Windows). It is probably the most widely used compiler. GCC does not include a graphical development environment but there are several graphical environments which can be used with GCC (and many are free/Free). There are a couple of other threads here relating to that, you might want to look around. Here is a link where you can learn more about GCC:

http://gcc.gnu.org/

It is included with all distributions of Linux and is widely used on other proprietary UNIX and non-UNIX platforms.

Here is the current list of platforms for which GCC can generate code:

http://gcc.gnu.org/install/specific.html

[ November 30, 2002: Message edited by: void main ]

TheQuirk:
Also, GCC is the de-faco compiler when it comes to embed devices (and is widly used on consumer computers and high-end computers). If you're planning to use it in Windows, I recommend Dev-C++. It comes with a build of GCC pre-packaged with the IDE.

In Unix, I'm very fond if Ajunta, although others prefer KDevelop for some unthinkable reason ( ), although lately I've been using Vim and GCC seperatly from command line, because I finally have reliable shell with backups and the ability to access to my programs (and code) from anywhere in the world.

Kintaro:
I just use vim, that or Emacs (when vim isnt avail).

As a last resort ill use nano or pico, which arnt that bad, i just prefer vim.

foobar:
When I still had KDE, I liked the advanced editor (wasn't it KWrite?) ... but since my terminal in X and the normal (/dev/vc/n in Mandrake) ones both produce a different ( " ), gcc cannot read the one from the xterm.

That was very confusing for a moment, 'cuz if I'd have a perfect piece of legal code, which also has:

scanf ("%s", &str);

gcc would say there is an error in that line, because it cannot read the ( " ) - characters.
So that would make gcc think I typed:

scanf (%s, &str);

And the funny part is when I type the same stuff in a tty, you see exactly the same characters appearing, only gcc reads it correctly ...

I never used emacs, I liked vi, so I didn't really need another editor. Vi is for me just fine.

Welcome to the boards btw, Ben ...

[ December 01, 2002: Message edited by: -=f00bar=- ]

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page