I'm not sure if this question is correct but...
Ok, is possible compiled the source vala in vala
because I bean downloading vala source code and inside has many vala files
here vala release source code
https://wiki.gnome.org/Vala/Release
I have been installed on windows this version
https://code.google.com/p/vala-win32/downloads/list
vala-0.12.0.exe
I wont compile the last vala release whit the vala on windows
oky, gracias :D
please, not confused with this question,
Compiling a Vala source On Windows
If 0.20.1 is enough, you can use http://www.tarnyko.net/en/?q=node/35 and possibly avoid this whole thing.
If you really need 0.22.0, Vala release tarballs don't actually require valac to compile—they contain all the generated C. You should be able to use the build system included with Vala (like Robert Rozas mentioned, or via cygwin) to generate executables even without valac installed.
GNOME wiki recommends using either MSYS2 or WSL (Windows 10 only) to get Vala compiler. Another option is using ValaForWindows, which aims to be the easiest option to install and use.
Related
Well, I am going to do some deep learning stuff with opencv.
I have already installed scikit-image and scikit-learn.
No, but you could install some C++ compiler on MacOSX.
Visual C++ is a C++ compiler and IDE for Windows (don't confuse it with Visual Studio Code, which is a cross-platform IDE). You need some compiler for MacOSX, which is a Unix variant and nearly POSIX (it could be certified to some specific POSIX standard, but I don't know which).
Probably, both GCC and Clang are available on MacOSX (see this). You need to find some packaged version of them, perhaps with brew; both compilers work really well. Apple is partly funding Clang. GCC is funded by many other corporations. They both are open source compilers, but with a different license (GCC is mostly GPLv3+). GCC is probably producing some faster code (when optimizing, faster by a few percents only). Clang is probably giving better diagnostics. I actually recommend installing both of them (and using occasionally both of them too).
Take care to install recent versions of GCC & Clang. Both are very active projects, and are progressing quite well.
You probably need to install other things too. E.g. a build automation tool (like GNU make), a version control system (like git), a source code editor (like emacs or vim).
You might even install some fancy IDE like Clion, Code::Blocks, XCode, etc.. I recommend avoiding that, because you need to learn how to compile on the command line. These fancy tools are running the command line compiler under the hoods, and you really need to understand what they are doing (and hiding from you). Actually C and C++ are somehow not IDE friendly (you really need to understand what the compiler is doing). In both C11 specification (n1570) and in C++11 specification (n3337) the notion of translation unit and of preprocessing is important (and sadly, IDEs tend to hide these notions).
As remarked in comments, you could install the XCode package (which pulls useful packages like GCC or Clang, etc...), but avoid using the XCode IDE.
I apologize if this question is out of topic, but it's a matter of accessibility for C++14 programmers.
Today i've updated Qt v5.4 on my PC (Windows 8.1/64bit/x86) and it support now the gcc compiler v4.9.2. But i've seen that constexpr relaxation (which really interest me) is available since gcc v5.1.
A search on google shows that :
clang is the better compiler for C++14 latest features (v3.6 is even dealing with experimental C++17)
clang is not easily suitable with Qt libraries
both gcc and clang "datas" are downloadable but i'm not an expert...
So i'm asking how to get a free IDE on Windows 8.1 with an adequate compiler.
If i dismiss Qt for my C++14 experiments, is Codeblocks a better solution ?
Does any else IDE already include an adequate compiler during the installation ?
Where can i find help to install such a compiler ?
Your question is poorly phrased -- for the most part, ide's and compilers are decoupled -- the exception that comes to mind is visual studio, which is an ide that is tightly coupled to microsoft's compiler.
Whether you chose codeblocks, or eclipse, or use a simple text editor, you should be able to choose your compiler fairly easily, and independently of your ide. So you have two independent questions: Where can you get a free compiler for windows with high standards compliance, and what's a good IDE with which to use that compiler.
I'm not a windows person, but very simple, one-file projects, you might actually find it easy to use a gnu-linux environment, which you can do under windows by using cygwin:
http://preshing.com/20141108/how-to-install-the-latest-gcc-on-windows/
This may seem daunting at first, but let me tell you the benefits:
you'll learn the difference between your compiler and editor.
As long as you are only experimenting with the standard, you may find it simpler to get set up than using an ide.
You'll have to learn about the c++ compile process (compiling, linking, possibly preprocessing), not about ide specific stuff.
This will prevent you from conflating ide-specific stuff with c++ stuff, as you have done in your question. As you begin working with projects you'll probably find an ide an advantage, but in the beginning staying close to the raw tools may give you the fastest learning return on investment.
After install cygwin, all you have to do is write your code (using a syntax highlighting editor like gedit or emacs is suggested), and then run
g++ -std=c++14 filename.cpp
to compile your code.
You should be able to use clang under cygwin as well.
reading this link :http://fdiv.net/2012/08/15/compiling-code-clang-api
i see i can load c/c++ file and compile it just fine to executable..
but i did't found any info if i have some kind of source code in c/c++
that my application generating or other way ..
in short can i pass the stage where i load the c file , and just build my own logic to compile to executable ?
Of course you can. And there is already a project for that purpose
Dig its source codes as your wish :)
Cling
What is Cling
Cling is an interactive C++ interpreter, built on the top of
LLVM and Clang libraries. Its advantages over the standard
interpreters are that it has command line prompt and uses
just-in-time (JIT) compiler for compilation. Many of the developers
(e.g. Mono in their project called CSharpRepl) of such kind
of software applications name them interactive compilers.
One of Cling's main goals is to provide contemporary, high-performance
alternative of the current C++ interpreter in the ROOT project -
CINT. The backward-compatibility with CINT is major priority during
the development.
I've been searching around the Lazarus IDE documentation for a bit, and thus far only found information related to cross compiling, so I was hoping someone could give me a straight answer on this. I'm currently working on a project that will require compilation for 32-bit Windows as well as 64-bit Windows. Additionally, I've already set up both versions of the Free Pascal Compiler. Does Lazarus have any built in functionality for configuring in both compilers, and then based on the build target, using the appropriate compiler? Ideally, this would be done at a global level, so that the configuration persists across projects, but if it can only be done at the project level, I don't mind doing it that way.
On further reading, I think I found my answer. I didn't realize it, but fpc has the same sort of front-end functionality as gcc. With that said, implementing the functionality described in my question is just a matter of installing the compiler as a cross compiler, rather than as an independent compiler. Since it doesn't look like you can use the x86_64 compiler to create a 32-bit version, you'll have to compile the 32-bit version, and then crosscompile the 64-bit version. In my case, I first compiled and installed the Win32 compiler using:
make all install INSTALL_PREFIX=C:\path\to\lazarus\1.0.8\fpc\2.6.3 OS_TARGET=win32 CPU_TARGET=i686 PP=ppc386.exe
Next, I compiled and crossinstalled the 64-bit compiler:
make crossall crossinstall INSTALL_PREFIX=C:\path\to\lazarus\1.0.8\fpc\2.6.3 OS_TARGET=win64 CPU_TARGET=x86_64
To confirm that it worked, you can find an executable called, ppcrossx64 in your C:\path\to\lazarus\1.0.8\fpc\2.6.3\bin\i386-win32 folder.
I'm using flex (lexical analyzer, not Adobe Flex) on a project. However, I want to be able to compile on Windows platforms as well, but the Windows version's newest version is only 2.5.4a, so it won't compile my file for version 2.5.35. And no, I can't downgrade to the highest supported Windows version.
Anyone know about plans to upgrade the windows version, or have a suggestion to compile on windows anyway?
You can ask on the mailing list, or get involved in the Flex project yourself. I think the code-base for Flex has remained static for a while, but I don't know who maintains the Windows port. In the interim...
I would recommend including the produced source in your project.
Generate the lexer on a Linux system to produce your lex.c/lex.h files (or whatever)
Include those files in your Win32 C source before you build
If you don't have direct access to a Linux system, a virtual machine might be a good idea. The Flex source should be complaint to some C standard that builds on Windows, but most of the POSIX differences can be altered to use Win32 API fairly easily.
Maybe distribute as:
/src/source_files.c
/src/lex.l
/src/win32_lex/lex.c
This way systems with a modern flex can generate the source from the lex file, and Windows systems compiling the source can use the complementary pre-processed C files.
Short of using some user-space POSIX (Cygwin or whatever).
A little bit of tweaking required, but isn't that portability for you!
Windows builds of flex 2.5.35 do exist, but unfortunately they are not self contained. You can download the MINGW build here, and the Cygwin build here; see also another stackoverflow question. Each build requires that its respective (MINGW or Cygwin) kernel be installed.