Any advanced c++ compilers available yet?
Are there any c++ compilers available yet that allow a beginner or hobby level programmer to include libraries as easily as can be done with other languages like Java or Python?
.
.
You can include libraries relatively easily with visual studio- or really with any compiler if you use some global settings. You could always make a plugin or change the code of code::blocks if you felt like giving it a go yourself. Text parsing is relatively simple- and you could learn quite a bit along the way! (c++ is really a do it yourself kind of language)
I personally use DMC (Digital Mars Compiler) with Code::Blocks. For writing code, I use Notepad++.
How easy do you need it? It already seems pretty easy. I add a #include at the top, and I add -l<library_name> to the link command. That's not a lot of effort.
The easiest way I have found for quickly installing and using external libraries is with Visual Studio using the Nuget package manager. Not all libs are available for VS2015 yet but I can confirm that at least boost, SFML2 and SDL2 are. The downside of this is the libs are installed on a per solution basis so you can end up with duplicate libraries.
Thanks for the responses.
Yes you could do X but how is the question. I am a hobby programmer without a degree in computer science. I learnt C (not c++) using Borland c++ on the old dos machines. Graphics was accessed directly with clear examples of how to do it.
The real do it yourself language was hitting the metal with Assembler but of course that is impossible on today's machines as you must use libraries to access hardware and work with the OS.
Often you get the told all you need to do is x,y and z without actually explaining how to do x,y and z.
Ideally x,y and z can be automated for general use with nothing more than an #include statement thus the reason for the question: has it been done for any c++ compiler.
And how do you add -l<library_name> to the link command. I have followed instructions to fill in what amounts to forms for linking, compiling building blah blah blah using the code::block compiler but if it fails and it has I can't fix it. I remember DevPak tools were used with the old Bloodshed Devc++ development environment I used many years ago although it was a bit flakey and unofficial.
As a hobby programmer I don't really want to buy Visual Studio.
I guess the answer to my question is no.
.
| wizebin wrote: You can include libraries relatively easily with visual studio- or really with any compiler if you use some global settings. You could always make a plugin or change the code of code::blocks if you felt like giving it a go yourself. Text parsing is relatively simple- and you could learn quite a bit along the way! (c++ is really a do it yourself kind of language) |
Yes you could do X but how is the question. I am a hobby programmer without a degree in computer science. I learnt C (not c++) using Borland c++ on the old dos machines. Graphics was accessed directly with clear examples of how to do it.
The real do it yourself language was hitting the metal with Assembler but of course that is impossible on today's machines as you must use libraries to access hardware and work with the OS.
Often you get the told all you need to do is x,y and z without actually explaining how to do x,y and z.
Ideally x,y and z can be automated for general use with nothing more than an #include statement thus the reason for the question: has it been done for any c++ compiler.
| Moschops (6214)wrote: How easy do you need it? It already seems pretty easy. I add a #include at the top, and I add -l<library_name> to the link command. That's not a lot of effort. |
And how do you add -l<library_name> to the link command. I have followed instructions to fill in what amounts to forms for linking, compiling building blah blah blah using the code::block compiler but if it fails and it has I can't fix it. I remember DevPak tools were used with the old Bloodshed Devc++ development environment I used many years ago although it was a bit flakey and unofficial.
| naraku9333 wrote: The easiest way I have found for quickly installing and using external libraries is with Visual Studio... |
As a hobby programmer I don't really want to buy Visual Studio.
I guess the answer to my question is no.
.
| As a hobby programmer I don't really want to buy Visual Studio. |
As a hobbyist, you can use the Community Edition of VS which is free.
And how do you add -l<library_name> to the link command. |
I do it by typing the following on the command line:
-l<library name>
For example, if I were linking against a library named beans, I would type the following:
-lbeans
My complete build command might be
g++ -lbeans main.cpp
You've made things hard for yourself by choosing to use a complicated IDE tool without learning how to use it, coupled with a lack of understanding of the C++ build chain, and now you're complaining about it whilst passive-aggressively whingeing. I think you might be better suited to Python.
Last edited on
| I guess the answer to my question is no. |
the answer to it is actually yes. Compilers (and compiler toolchains like GCC and Clang) are very advanced, complicated pieces of software (For a look at a very, very, very small portion of what goes into a compiler, take a look at https://gist.github.com/ntchambers/92584ab36c285e7f53be ). There is a lot that goes into them, because a lot has to come out, for a lot of systems, correctly. The fact that you aren't understanding how to invoke it from code::blocks does not change the advancement of the compiler. It is actually pretty simple, and will just get simpler as C++17(?) gets support for modules. An important part of programming is understanding your tools, and if you're not willing to do that, you won't make it very far.
edit:
| include libraries as easily as can be done with other languages like Java or Python? |
you've obviously never tried to build C code using the python FFI. that is not easy at all
Last edited on
Sorry my question was wrongly put. I meant: Is there a simple to use c++ IDE for importing libraries?
The complexity of the compiler probably has nothing to do with it.
A library essentially adds commands to whatever language you are using. How complicated it is to import that library is determined by those who write the ide.
I am a hobby programmer using BASIC but I did like the older versions of the c++ language which I used on the old dos machines as it produced very fast running code.
.
The complexity of the compiler probably has nothing to do with it.
A library essentially adds commands to whatever language you are using. How complicated it is to import that library is determined by those who write the ide.
I am a hobby programmer using BASIC but I did like the older versions of the c++ language which I used on the old dos machines as it produced very fast running code.
.
Topic archived. No new replies allowed.