Screenshot instructions:
Windows
Mac
Red Hat Linux
Ubuntu
Click URL instructions:
Right-click on ad, choose "Copy Link", then paste here →
(This may not be possible with some types of ads)
From: Wu Yongwei <adah@ne...> - 2002-07-23 01:49:02
|
- If you already have MSVC, it might give you an easier start. However, MinGW is FREE, while MSVC will cost you hundreds of dollars. I think the compilers are as good, but MinGW lacks an IDE. And since it does not support MFC, so you are out of luck if you need to do MFC programming. - Add a line to your C:\AUTOEXEC.BAT like: PATH %PATH%;C:\mingw\bin - If you have a hello.c, type "gcc hello.c -o hello" to get the executable "hello.exe"; if you have a hello.cpp, type "g++ hello.cpp -o hello". Visit http://www.mingw.org/ for more information. Best regards Wu Yongwei --- Original Message from enshin_zlash@... --- yes i'm a newbie. all i want to know are the following things. -People have recommended me to use MingW instead of Microsoft Visual C++. Is MingW as good as MVC++? -How do I get MingW working? I don't know exactly how to put the PATH variable (on Win 98). I unzipped all the contents of the main distribution to C:/MingW. Now what? -How do i run it from command line? sorry if these questions were asked before, but the MingW FAQ was really no help for me. |
From: Wu Yongwei <adah@ne...> - 2002-07-23 02:46:07
|
Hey, don't mislead newbies. A debugger is a wonderful thing if you ever need to do some serious programming and is easier than manually inserting printfs or couts. Just contrary to what you said, a debugger helps people understand how a program works. I also think your "editor" advice is bad for newbies. They will just get frustrated. IDEs are just for newbies and GUI programming. I generally do not use an IDE because the above statement is not fit for me. A learner is different. Do you never use a debugger? Best regards, Wu Yongwei --- Original Message from Oscar Fuentes --- A good text editor plus the compiler is all what you need. Don't use a debugger, either. You *must* understand why your little practice programs does not works. If they don't work, fix them by thinking. |
From: Oscar Fuentes <ofv@wa...> - 2002-07-23 03:33:27
|
"Wu Yongwei" <adah@...> writes: > Hey, don't mislead newbies. .... > A debugger is a wonderful thing if you ever need to do some serious > programming Exactly: serious programming. But it's fequent use is an indication that the programmer is not very serious... (A different thing is when you need to fix bugs introduced by others). > and is easier than manually inserting printfs or couts. Yes, it's easier. On Real World scenarios, 'printf' wins. Ever tried to use a debugger with a multi-threaded app? > Just contrary to what you said, a debugger helps people understand > how a program works. If a beginner needs a debugger for understanding how the program works, his learning system is flawed. Programming is about writing specifications previously thought or known. If you face yourself often using a debugger for understanding what your code does, better look for a different job. > I also think your "editor" advice is bad for newbies. They will just get > frustrated. Why? Type code, save, go to the command-line, compile, run, have fun. Of course, a decent editor allows launching the compiler with a keypress or a menu option and parses the compiler error messages in a way that allows jumping to the signaled text position quickly. > IDEs are just for newbies and GUI programming. I generally do > not use an IDE because the above statement is not fit for me. A learner is > different. Precisely, a learner should know what's going on. He should know about the edit->compile->link->run process. The IDE hides that. From time to time I see some veteran MSVC++ or BCB programmer who doesn't know how to build a simple multifile application from the command line. Without the IDE they are lost. Pathetic. OTOH, I use Emacs. It launches the compiler or MAKE and parses the output nicely. You can run gdb on it. It's the best IDE I know. > Do you never use a debugger? On complex projects, when I can't see what's wrong looking at the sources. If, after detecting the mistake with the debugger, it's not a third-party bug, it's time for a long meditation about how to do for not repeating the mistake. -- Oscar |
From: Paul Whitfield <paulw@mi...> - 2002-07-23 04:30:36
|
Oscar Different strokes for different folks. Sometimes the best solution is thinking Sometimes it is a well placed printf and Often it is stepping throught the code with a debugger Don't discount the fact that one of the best ways to understand and review code is to single step through it. Debuggers are good tools that should be used by all levels of programmers. Like all tools they are good for some things and not so good for others. Regards Paul Oscar Fuentes wrote: > "Wu Yongwei" <adah@...> writes: > > >>Hey, don't mislead newbies. > > > .... > > >>A debugger is a wonderful thing if you ever need to do some serious >>programming > > > Exactly: serious programming. But it's fequent use is an indication > that the programmer is not very serious... (A different thing is when > you need to fix bugs introduced by others). > > >>and is easier than manually inserting printfs or couts. > > > Yes, it's easier. On Real World scenarios, 'printf' wins. Ever tried > to use a debugger with a multi-threaded app? > > >>Just contrary to what you said, a debugger helps people understand >>how a program works. > > > If a beginner needs a debugger for understanding how the program > works, his learning system is flawed. Programming is about writing > specifications previously thought or known. If you face yourself often > using a debugger for understanding what your code does, better look > for a different job. > > >>I also think your "editor" advice is bad for newbies. They will just get >>frustrated. > > > Why? Type code, save, go to the command-line, compile, run, have > fun. Of course, a decent editor allows launching the compiler with a > keypress or a menu option and parses the compiler error messages in a > way that allows jumping to the signaled text position quickly. > > >>IDEs are just for newbies and GUI programming. I generally do >>not use an IDE because the above statement is not fit for me. A learner is >>different. > > > Precisely, a learner should know what's going on. He should know about > the edit->compile->link->run process. The IDE hides that. > >>From time to time I see some veteran MSVC++ or BCB programmer who > doesn't know how to build a simple multifile application from the > command line. Without the IDE they are lost. Pathetic. > > OTOH, I use Emacs. It launches the compiler or MAKE and parses the > output nicely. You can run gdb on it. It's the best IDE I know. > > >>Do you never use a debugger? > > > On complex projects, when I can't see what's wrong looking at the > sources. If, after detecting the mistake with the debugger, it's not a > third-party bug, it's time for a long meditation about how to do for > not repeating the mistake. > |
From: Bob Wilson <bob@ph...> - 2002-07-23 05:34:03
|
Oscar, > Exactly: serious programming. But it's fequent use is an indication > that the programmer is not very serious... (A different thing is when > you need to fix bugs introduced by others). > > If a beginner needs a debugger for understanding how the program > works, his learning system is flawed. Programming is about writing > specifications previously thought or known. If you face yourself often > using a debugger for understanding what your code does, better look > for a different job. There is a huge difference between learning a new language and programming environment and designing and coding a complex application. I agree that it is a sign of a flawed design process or program logic if an experienced programmer is forced to make frequent use of a debugger, but I strongly disagree that when someone who is new to a language or dialect of a language (MSVC++ or mingw for example) frequently uses a debugger that he/she has a flawed learning system. > > I also think your "editor" advice is bad for newbies. They will just get > > frustrated. > > Why? Type code, save, go to the command-line, compile, run, have > fun. Of course, a decent editor allows launching the compiler with a > keypress or a menu option and parses the compiler error messages in a > way that allows jumping to the signaled text position quickly. > > > IDEs are just for newbies and GUI programming. I generally do > > not use an IDE because the above statement is not fit for me. A learner is > > different. > > Precisely, a learner should know what's going on. He should know about > the edit->compile->link->run process. The IDE hides that. > > >From time to time I see some veteran MSVC++ or BCB programmer who > doesn't know how to build a simple multifile application from the > command line. Without the IDE they are lost. Pathetic. Let's get back to real basics and go back to assembly language and a line editor!!! Delphi, MSVC++, and others form a 4th and 5th generations language and/or programming tools which, properly used, greatly enhance programming efficiency and programmer productivity. If a programmer, programming team, employer, or whatever, elects to use MSVC++, Delphi, etc., detailed knowledge of what goes on in the background in regards to compiling and linking is not required. However, if one uses gcc and a simple editor, it is critical. That said, I believe that it is good to know what goes on behind the IDE, but, again, the knowledge does not have to be as detailed in a 4th or 5th generation IDE/language combination as you seem to imply. > On complex projects, when I can't see what's wrong looking at the > sources. If, after detecting the mistake with the debugger, it's not a > third-party bug, it's time for a long meditation about how to do for > not repeating the mistake. On this, I could not agree more. If it is neither a third party bug nor a typo, it is time to re-evaluate the program's logic and structure as well as evaluating whether the code follows the design document and included algorithms. Regards, Bob Wilson |
From: John Brown <johnbrown105@ho...> - 2002-07-23 11:33:23
|
At the time of this writing, the post or posts to which Bob Wilson replied have not arrived in my mailbox, but: Somebody wrote: > > >From time to time I see some veteran MSVC++ or BCB programmer who > > doesn't know how to build a simple multifile application from the > > command line. Without the IDE they are lost. Pathetic. Bob Wilson replied: > >Let's get back to real basics and go back to assembly language and a line >editor!!! > I say only wimps use assembly language. REAL programmers write in binary with a hex editor. Somebody wrote: > > sources. If, after detecting the mistake with the debugger, it's not a > > third-party bug, Debuggers are particularly good for detecting third-party bugs. For example, I posted recently on a problem that I am having. The program works when compiled with BCC 5.5, but not with gcc-2.95.3-6. Liberal use of printf helped me to identify the problem (but not solve it; I will post on that later) My program was logically correct, so no amount of analysis, meditation or prayer helped. I had to see what the program was doing. Note that using printf is conceptually the same as using a debugger. For me, it is easier than using gdb. OK, I admit it, I am the wimpiest of all. You might argue that someone who is learning is not going to be using a lot of third-party libraries, but my problem was not with any old third-party API. It was with the Win32 API (specifically OLE Automation). while I am not learning to write in C, I AM learning to wrte an OLE Automation controller in C. _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com |
From: Al Stevens <al@al...> - 2002-07-23 13:40:22
|
> I say only wimps use assembly language. REAL programmers write in binary > with a hex editor. Wimp. Real programmers toggle it in through the front panel. |
From: Bob Wilson <bob@ph...> - 2002-07-23 22:46:11
|
> Wimp. Real programmers toggle it in through the front panel. Wrong again. Real programmers use patch cords on an analog computer. |
From: M Joshua Ryan <josh@um...> - 2002-07-23 22:56:41
|
On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, Bob Wilson wrote: > > Wimp. Real programmers toggle it in through the front panel. > > Wrong again. Real programmers use patch cords on an analog computer. > don't they make quantum computers with tweezers and potato jelly? |
From: Dave Rowbotham <gandalf@sl...> - 2002-07-23 11:42:29
Attachments:
Message as HTML
|
surely what matters is whether your program works, not what is was = written with? |
From: Ken Cornetet <Ken.Cornetet@ki...> - 2002-07-23 15:17:51
|
Wimp! Real programmers use miniature arc welders to change the ROM chips. Remember Bruce Dern in "Silent Running"? He reprogrammed one of the gardening robots to make it a surgeon, turned it loose, and gassed himself for the operation. No testing whatsoever! Now that's a "real programmer"! Speaking of front panels, I've got the front panel from a Hewlett-Packard 1000 F-series, which as far as I know, was one of the last general-purpose computers to actually have a front panel. They were sold up till 1990 or so. Anyone know of anything more recent? -----Original Message----- From: Al Stevens [mailto:al@...] Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 8:40 AM To: MinGW-users@... Subject: Re: [Mingw-users] sorry to annoy you all, but i really need help > I say only wimps use assembly language. REAL programmers write in binary > with a hex editor. Wimp. Real programmers toggle it in through the front panel. ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ MinGW-users mailing list MinGW-users@... You may change your MinGW Account Options or unsubscribe at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-users |
From: Wu Yongwei <adah@ne...> - 2002-07-24 02:19:54
|
>> and is easier than manually inserting printfs or couts. > Yes, it's easier. On Real World scenarios, 'printf' wins. Ever tried > to use a debugger with a multi-threaded app? Yes, I tried and failed terribly with GDB (MSVC was not an option for I programmed on Linux). So I switched to writing a log file with fprintf. -- Does a newbie need to know this (let alone it is a problem of the specific debugger)? Things need to be done step by step. By the way, MSVC can trace into a multi-threaded application nicely. I admit that there are many flaws in MSVC, but it is really an efficient production tool. It fits nicely for both newbies and veterans, even considering its price. If one is used to the IDE and cannot use a command line, it indicates either: 1) he is busy and is not interested in the low-level things; 2) he is lazy. Either way, it's his business if he can do the job. Best regards, Wu Yongwei |
From: Al Stevens <al@al...> - 2002-07-23 02:18:22
|
> but MinGW lacks an IDE. There are two free IDEs that support MinGW, Quincy 2000 and Dev-C++. http://www.alstevens.com/quincy2000 http://sourceforge.net/projects/dev-cpp/ > And since it does not support MFC, so you are out of luck if you need to do MFC programming. But there are free Win32 application framework class libraries. One is wxWindows. http://www.wxwindows.org |
From: Tim Hentenaar <tth@on...> - 2002-07-23 03:32:32
|
On Mon, 22 Jul 2002 22:18:05 -0400 "Al Stevens" <al@...> wrote: > > but MinGW lacks an IDE. > > There are two free IDEs that support MinGW, Quincy 2000 and Dev-C++. > > http://www.alstevens.com/quincy2000 > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/dev-cpp/ > > > And since it does not support MFC, so you are out of luck if you need to > do MFC programming. > > But there are free Win32 application framework class libraries. One is > wxWindows. > > http://www.wxwindows.org > I've never used wxWindows, but i've heard it was good, and it's also cross-platform. As for a GUI, I use gvim (http://vim.org). you can get the windows version at: [ftp://ftp.vim.org/pub/vim/pc/gvim61.zip] I wouldn't touch MFC with a 10' pole. They never do stay with standards, they have to have "M$-Specific" things.... A few good referneces: http://cplusplus.com/ref/ http://home.fhtw-berlin.de/~junghans/cref/ I also post code on the C++ section on my forums, and on PSC. HTH, Tim Hentenaar Systems Administrator Xodian Network - http://xodian.net |
From: Bob Wilson <bob@ph...> - 2002-07-23 05:00:49
|
> There are two free IDEs that support MinGW, Quincy 2000 and Dev-C++. > > http://www.alstevens.com/quincy2000 > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/dev-cpp/ Actually there are three. The third is: http://www.fixedsys.com/context/ |
From: Earnie Boyd <earnie_boyd@ya...> - 2002-07-23 14:13:13
|
Bob Wilson wrote: > > > There are two free IDEs that support MinGW, Quincy 2000 and Dev-C++. > > > > http://www.alstevens.com/quincy2000 > > > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/dev-cpp/ > > Actually there are three. The third is: > > http://www.fixedsys.com/context/ > Hmm... No one responded with http:/Visual-MinGW.sf.net what a shame. Earnie. |
From: Manu <mingw-users@li...> - 2002-07-23 15:27:44
|
Earnie Boyd wrote: > Hmm... No one responded with http:/Visual-MinGW.sf.net what a shame. :) Thanks Earnie for your support concerning Visual-MinGW project. I appreciate that. Though, I'm not shocked, if nobody mentioned the project before, since it's still Alpha and not yet user friendly for newbies. (and, maybe it's simply not a good IDE ;) Personally, I discovered C coding with Dev-C++ 4 and therefore, I discovered MinGW using Dev'. Then, I would probably recommend Dev-C++ 4 for real newbies-- The next step could be to use VIDE or a similar IDE. I learned what a makefile was with VIDE. (thanks Paul ;) Then I started this "damned" Visual-MinGW project, with an educational purpose for me, to practice C coding and to develop something I was interested with: A new IDE :] That's Visual-MinGW ! Yet another IDE for MinGW. Anyway, enough rambling. I would conclude that Visual-MinGW still advances, I often post CVS changes to its mailing-list (http://sourceforge.net/mail/?group_id=46778) the following document also explains how to get the sources anonymously from the CVS repository. (Thanks to Ken Fitlike) http://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=12121&group_id=46778 (note: The brand new "AutoHide" feature will be ready in a few days) Manu B. ---- Visual-MinGW, An Open Source IDE for MinGW compiler. Home page: http://visual-mingw.sourceforge.net/ Project home: http://sourceforge.net/projects/visual-mingw/ Sources from CVS repository: http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/visual-mingw/visual-mingw/ |
From: Al Stevens <al@al...> - 2002-07-28 19:22:19
|
Hello, Manu I've been looking closely at Visual MinGW. I am particularly interested in the Win32 application framework classes with which you built a application with tabbed panes and an MDI frame for the editor in a splitter window. Did you develop this framework yourself? Or is it from another source? I am studying it with the intention of porting my own MinGW IDE (http://www.alstevens.com/quincy.html) away from MFC and its dependance on Visual C++. Al Stevens Dr. Dobb's Journal |
From: Michael Torrie <torriem@cs...> - 2002-07-28 20:19:03
Attachments:
application/pgp-signature
|
On Sun, 2002-07-28 at 13:22, Al Stevens wrote: > Hello, Manu >=20 > I've been looking closely at Visual MinGW. I am particularly interested i= n > the Win32 application framework classes with which you built a applicatio= n > with tabbed panes and an MDI frame for the editor in a splitter window. D= id > you develop this framework yourself? Or is it from another source? I am > studying it with the intention of porting my own MinGW IDE > (http://www.alstevens.com/quincy.html) away from MFC and its dependance o= n > Visual C++. From my experience, the best toolkit to use to replace MFC is wxWindows. It's fairly close to MFC in many ways (including message maps, etc.) If there are some widgets not in wxWindows, it is trivial to implement the widget from scratch or from another similar window. I haven't made any large apps from wxWindows, but the more I use it, the more I like it. Having a native build (and look and feel) on each platform is nice. I have used GTK+ in the past on Linux and Windows, but there's so many dll dependencies now. With wxWindows I can build one nice exe with no .dll dependencies on windows. And the code is instantly compilable on Linux. Worth a look, anyway. Michael >=20 > Al Stevens > Dr. Dobb's Journal >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > _______________________________________________ > MinGW-users mailing list > MinGW-users@... >=20 > You may change your MinGW Account Options or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-users --=20 Public key available from http://students.cs.byu.edu/~torriem |
From: Manu <mingw-users@li...> - 2002-07-28 21:53:47
|
Hi, Al Stevens wrote: > Hello, Manu > > I've been looking closely at Visual MinGW. I am particularly interested in > the Win32 application framework classes with which you built a application > with tabbed panes and an MDI frame for the editor in a splitter window. We are a little bit off topic here. That may be annoying for most MinGW users. I suggest posting to the "visual-mingw-general" list, I'm also forwarding the reply there. (The list is currently very quiet indeed, more activity will be nice ;) . > Did > you develop this framework yourself? Yes, my goal was to (learn programming and to :) have some very simple and small C++ classes to benefit of the C++ advantages without coding libraries drawbacks. (unreliable and bloated apps) There's a great site which explains how to create floating toolbars or splitters for example: http://freespace.virgin.net/james.brown7/index.htm (A reference !) BTW, WinSpy++ is a fabulous tool. > Or is it from another source? I am > studying it with the intention of porting my own MinGW IDE > (http://www.alstevens.com/quincy.html) away from MFC and its dependance on > Visual C++. Very good, I applaud your intention :) It wouldn't be very difficult to continue these small classes, to add floating toolbars, and so on. (but keeping it small and fast ;) Another important point. I'm planning to separate the GUI classes from Visual-MinGW, but I'm still wondering about the license to adopt : LGPL, BFD, public domain ??? Manu. |
From: Al Stevens <al@al...> - 2002-07-28 23:45:57
|
> We are a little bit off topic here. That may be annoying for most MinGW users. I hadn't intended to send the message to the list. But I wouldn't think something having to do with using MinGW should annoy MinGW users, particularly about the development of IDEs.. > Another important point. I'm planning to separate the GUI classes from Visual-MinGW, > but I'm still wondering about the license to adopt : > LGPL, BFD, public domain ??? That's a personal decision. I've been publishing source code for many years now and, for the most part, it's in the public domain. Makes things a lot less complicated. The derivative works, your modified header files, for example, must stay under the license that covers them now. I don't plan to use your source code directly, only to study it to see how you made the application windows work. Mine would look a lot less like MFC and would use namespaces. But don't be surprised if you read your name in my column in Dr. Dobb's Journal. :-) My Quincy IDE, having been around for about six years, already works although I'm having to change the debugger to support gcc 3.1. Having to do that, a big job, got me to thinking about fixing it so that Quincy can build Quincy and that means no more MFC. Al Stevens Dr. Dobb's Journal |
From: Paul Whitfield <paulw@mi...> - 2002-07-29 01:45:59
|
Al Stevens wrote: >>We are a little bit off topic here. That may be annoying for most MinGW > > users. > > I hadn't intended to send the message to the list. But I wouldn't think > something having to do with using MinGW should annoy MinGW users, > particularly about the development of IDEs.. > Hey... I like to see stuff like this on the list. > >>Another important point. I'm planning to separate the GUI classes from > [snip] > My Quincy IDE, having been around for about six years, already works > although I'm having to change the debugger to support gcc 3.1. Having to do > that, a big job, got me to thinking about fixing it so that Quincy can build > Quincy and that means no more MFC. > Hey if you go wxwindow maybe we could look forward to the Linux version of Quincy??? I can see a whole string of columns about cross platform IDE/Debuggers... > Al Stevens > Dr. Dobb's Journal Sadly the Australian Peso doesn't buy enough Greenbacks these days so I don't get DDJ anymore... But I do always enjoy your articles. Regards Paul |
From: Al Stevens <al@al...> - 2002-07-29 03:38:34
|
----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Whitfield" <paulw@...> To: "Al Stevens" <al@...> Cc: "MinGW-users" <MinGW-users@...> Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 9:40 PM Subject: Re: [Mingw-users] Visual MinGW GUI library > Hey if you go wxwindow maybe we could look forward to the Linux version > of Quincy??? Probably not. There's still a lot of Win32-centric stuff. Not that it wouldn't be possible, but I really don't want to start from scratch. The editor has a lot of Win32 specific code. Launching the compiler and running the debugger are done quite differently from how it would be done in Linux, too. A cross-platform GUI framework is only a small part of the problem. |
From: Al Stevens <al@al...> - 2002-08-06 21:08:53
|
Hi, Manu. I plan to write something about Visual MinGW in Dr. Dobb's Journal. With your permission I'll write a brief piece about you as the builder of the program. If you are willing, I'd like to ask you some questions: 1. Where do you live? 2. Whom do you work for? 3. How old are you? 4. Where did you receive your education? 5. You mentioned that you developed the IDE partly to learn C programming. What is your programming background prior to this project? 6. What resources did you find helpful as you began the project? 7. What is your full name? 8. How many users does VM have? 9. When did you begin to develop VM? 10. As an open source project, does VM get many submissions from other programmers? Please add anything else you'd like in order for me to know you better. Thanks for considering my requests. Regards, Al Stevens Dr. Dobb's Journal |
From: Manu \(mingw-users\) <mingw-users@li...> - 2002-08-09 07:12:07
|
Al Stevens wrote: [snip] > > > My IDE uses the weditres program from the LCC-Win32 compiler system. > > > http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32/. > > > > I use the same one, it's good but not Open Source. > > It writes .res files. I'd rather see one that works from .rc text files and > that writes its output to .rc files like the VC++ resource editor does. I > like as many things to be text as possible so I can fix them manually when > the GUI tools can't. IMHO, it's up to the Open Source community to join efforts and start a resource editor project ;) BTW, I'm still wondering something, maybe an idea to start such project. I saw that windres uses a rc parser (rcparse.c), I can't really figure out how it works, I just know that it's generated from a Bison script. Anyway, I'm wondering if that parser could be used in a resource editor ? Maybe other parts of windres, or windres itself could be used as well ? Any clues in that direction would be appreciated, since users often required a GUI resource editor on this list and on other ones. Finally, such editor could be fully "compatible" with windres and it may be distributed as a MinGW package/contribution, as well as with misc IDEs. Thanks, Manu. |