| Trolltech Home | Qt-interest Home | Recent Threads | All Threads | Author | Date | |
| All threads index page 5 | |
is there a faster (yet free) alternative to g++ for Qtopia app development? g++ is very slow and takes minutes just to compile a simple file. a lot of my time is wasted to wait for compilation. I currently have v2.96. any hint is useful!! thanks ben
Hi, You shouldn't use gcc2.96 -- it was never meant for release. You should use either gcc2.95 or gcc3.0 David On Tue, 12 Mar 2002, Ben Hui wrote: > is there a faster (yet free) alternative to g++ for Qtopia app development? > g++ is very slow and takes minutes just to compile a simple file. a lot of > my time is wasted to wait for compilation. I currently have v2.96. any hint > is useful!! thanks > > ben > > -- > List archive and information: http://qt-interest.trolltech.com
On Tue, 12 Mar 2002, David Bruhwiler wrote: > Hi, > You shouldn't use gcc2.96 -- it was never meant for release. Don't spread FUD. Read http://www.bero.org/gcc296.html for details. > You should use either gcc2.95 or gcc3.0 2.95 compiles pretty fast, but generates horrible code and doesn't speak proper C++. 3.0 is rather buggy (doesn't compile KDE 2.2.2 properly). The next "good" release of gcc will be 3.1, probably in April this year. LLaP bero -- [ signature omitted ]
> On Tue, 12 Mar 2002, David Bruhwiler wrote: > > > Hi, > > You shouldn't use gcc2.96 -- it was never meant for release. > > Don't spread FUD. Read http://www.bero.org/gcc296.html for details. > Well I wouldn't do that. However... I have a small software library which decodes wavelet images. I have built it with both gcc2.95 and gcc2.96 In both cases it compiles without any warnings and runs without any runtime assertions, exceptions, or failures. (It also compiles and runs fine on windows with the MSVC compiler). The problem is that the gcc2.96 version doesn't work. The data it produces is just wrong. I can barely understand the wavelet algorithm in C++ form. I certainly don't have time to debug it in machine code. What would you do? -- [ signature omitted ]
FYI about the 2.96 version. http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-2.96.html It explains why it wasn't meant for release. Clint On Tuesday 12 March 2002 10:51 am, Paul Robertson wrote: > > On Tue, 12 Mar 2002, David Bruhwiler wrote: > > > Hi, > > > You shouldn't use gcc2.96 -- it was never meant for release. > > > > Don't spread FUD. Read http://www.bero.org/gcc296.html for details. > > Well I wouldn't do that. However... > > I have a small software library which decodes wavelet images. > I have built it with both gcc2.95 and gcc2.96 > In both cases it compiles without any warnings and runs without any runtime > assertions, exceptions, or failures. (It also compiles and runs fine on > windows with the MSVC compiler). > > The problem is that the gcc2.96 version doesn't work. The data it produces > is just wrong. > > I can barely understand the wavelet algorithm in C++ form. I certainly > don't have time to debug it in machine code. What would you do?
On Tue, 12 Mar 2002, David Bruhwiler wrote: > Hi, > You shouldn't use gcc2.96 -- it was never meant for release. > You should use either gcc2.95 or gcc3.0 > David I've been using 2.96 (shipped with Mandrake 8.0) without problems for the best part of a year. Nick
> I've been using 2.96 (shipped with Mandrake 8.0) without problems for the > best part of a year. This is more of a Qtopia SDK issue, but the libraries et rest, and the cross-compile tools for ARM are based on gcc 2.95.2, so it would be optimal to target with this compiler version in mind especially when dealing with strange ARM instruction code issues on the target platform. --Kent
gcc 2.96 is broken. I got into problem with templates using the ACE Framework. It depends whether or not it works for you. If you are not using every available feature in the C++ language especially with templates, it may as well work for you. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Try FREE Yahoo! Mail - the world's greatest free email! http://mail.yahoo.com/
On Tue, 12 Mar 2002, Salman Khilji wrote: > gcc 2.96 is broken. I got into problem with templates > using the ACE Framework. It depends whether or not it > works for you. If you are not using every available > feature in the C++ language especially with templates, > it may as well work for you. Hmmm.... I guess everything has bugs in if you dig deep enough. Including commercial compilers. For example, the getline(istream,string) function is broken in Visual C++, forcing you to use old style C strings if you want to read in from the keyboard. In gcc 2.96 this works fine. Nick
On Tue, 12 Mar 2002, Ben Hui wrote: > is there a faster (yet free) alternative to g++ for Qtopia app development? > g++ is very slow and takes minutes just to compile a simple file. a lot of > my time is wasted to wait for compilation. I currently have v2.96. any hint > is useful!! thanks > I haven't tested it too thoroughly, but you could allways give Intel's compiler a go (there's a free linux version). http://developer.intel.com/software/products/eval/ -- [ signature omitted ]
On Wednesday 13 March 2002 02:57 am, Tarjei Knapstad wrote: > On Tue, 12 Mar 2002, Ben Hui wrote: > > is there a faster (yet free) alternative to g++ for Qtopia app > > development? g++ is very slow and takes minutes just to compile a simple > > file. a lot of my time is wasted to wait for compilation. I currently > > have v2.96. any hint is useful!! thanks > > I haven't tested it too thoroughly, but you could allways give Intel's > compiler a go (there's a free linux version). > > http://developer.intel.com/software/products/eval/ I've heard that the intel compiler produces superior results, but takes more time to compile.
<<< text/html: EXCLUDED >>>