| Trolltech Home | Qt-interest Home | Recent Threads | All Threads | Author | Date | |
| All threads index page 1 | |
Hi folk, I'm using MinGW compiler on Win32, its speed is very low by comparing with M$ Visual Studio compiler or Java compiler. So can you help me to increase the speed of compiling process by MinGW, or giving me another compiler? note: I'm using Eclipse/QT integrated. -- [ signature omitted ]
M. Bashir Al-Noimi schrieb: > Hi folk, > ... > So can you help me to increase the speed of compiling process by MinGW, > or giving me another compiler? AFAIK Qt 4.3.2 now officially supports Visual Studio Express (I guess you are talking about the NonCommercial Qt versions). Cheers, Oliver -- [ signature omitted ]
Till Oliver Knoll wrote: > M. Bashir Al-Noimi schrieb: >> Hi folk, >> ... >> So can you help me to increase the speed of compiling process by >> MinGW, or giving me another compiler? > > AFAIK Qt 4.3.2 now officially supports Visual Studio Express (I guess > you are talking about the NonCommercial Qt versions). > > Cheers, Oliver > > -- > To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with > "unsubscribe" in the subject or the body. > List archive and information: http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/ > > > Yeb, I'm talking about open source versions, i don't want to use commercial products. -- [ signature omitted ]
M. Bashir Al-Noimi schrieb:
> Yeb,
>
> I'm talking about open source versions, i don't want to use commercial products.
Then you could use Visual Studio Express which is also still free,
("free" as in "free beer") together with the latest Open Source Qt 4.3.2.
But as I understand you have to fiddle around with the moc- and
uic-steps manually, no Qt Integration available (not even for paying
customers, but that's due to the limitations in the free Visual Studio
Express ;) ) But at least the compiler is now officially supported (the
required "mkspecs" are now provided by Qt 4.3.2 Open Source).
But when your projects are qmake (*.pro) based then the moc steps are
still done for you automatically and you don't need to worry about them;
and once you have setup all the necessary *.pro files you can probably
have qmake gerenarte the corresponding Visual Studio project/solution
files (with the required custom build steps).
Cheers, Oliver
--
[ signature omitted ]
Hello,
On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 12:51:03 +0200 Till Oliver Knoll <oliver.knoll@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> M. Bashir Al-Noimi schrieb:
> > Yeb,
> >
> > I'm talking about open source versions, i don't want to use commercial products.
>
>
> Then you could use Visual Studio Express which is also still free,
> ("free" as in "free beer") together with the latest Open Source Qt 4.3.2.
>
> But as I understand you have to fiddle around with the moc- and
> uic-steps manually, no Qt Integration available (not even for paying
> customers, but that's due to the limitations in the free Visual Studio
> Express ;) ) But at least the compiler is now officially supported (the
> required "mkspecs" are now provided by Qt 4.3.2 Open Source).
>
> But when your projects are qmake (*.pro) based then the moc steps are
> still done for you automatically and you don't need to worry about them;
> and once you have setup all the necessary *.pro files you can probably
> have qmake gerenarte the corresponding Visual Studio project/solution
> files (with the required custom build steps).
And for the ones who don't want to use the IDE of MSVC++, they can
use .pro files, nmake and the compiler/linker of MSVC++ only, in
addition to their favorite text editor and file manager.
Regards,
--
[ signature omitted ]
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Thursday 04 October 2007 12:41:02 M. Bashir Al-Noimi wrote: > Till Oliver Knoll wrote: > > M. Bashir Al-Noimi schrieb: > >> Hi folk, > >> ... > >> So can you help me to increase the speed of compiling process by > >> MinGW, or giving me another compiler? > > > > AFAIK Qt 4.3.2 now officially supports Visual Studio Express (I guess > > you are talking about the NonCommercial Qt versions). > > > > Cheers, Oliver > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with > > "unsubscribe" in the subject or the body. > > List archive and information: http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/ > > Yeb, > > I'm talking about open source versions, i don't want to use commercial > products. Loading up Linux in vmware is always an option. :D -Benjamin Meyer -- [ signature omitted ]
Benjamin Meyer wrote: > On Thursday 04 October 2007 12:41:02 M. Bashir Al-Noimi wrote: >> I'm talking about open source versions, i don't want to use commercial >> products. > > Loading up Linux in vmware is always an option. :D Or do you mean Windows in KVM under Linux? That's what I use to run development in Windows. Much smoother. By the way, compiler speed of gcc is "slow" in Windows not because of gcc, but because, * you are compiling with all optimizations (gcc still faster than MSVC on my sources). Compile in debug mode unless you are deploying. * Windows sucks at starting processes and gcc process is started on each file you want to compile. This is probably what makes gcc slow. I do not use MinGW, but I can testify that gcc seems faster than MSVC 2005. Just my personal opinion. - Adam -- [ signature omitted ]
On torsdag den 4. Oktober 2007, M. Bashir Al-Noimi wrote: > I'm talking about open source versions, i don't want to use commercial > products. Strange comment, when you're coding on Windows. Bo. -- [ signature omitted ]
Hey Muhammad, > I'm using MinGW compiler on Win32, its speed is very low by comparing > with M$ Visual Studio compiler or Java compiler. > So can you help me to increase the speed of compiling process by MinGW, > or giving me another compiler? MinGW32 g++ IS slower than the M$ compiler. This is true and will probably always be. My very own experience is, that it gets many times faster if you put adequate memory into your machine. Besides - what version of g++ are you using (Try "g++ --version" on command line)? I get reasonable speed with MinGW32-g++ 4.1.2 ... of course I am using precompiled headers to increase speed even more :-) Comparing to a JAVA-Compiler does not give any usable information. It's like comparing apples to pears. ;-) Regards, Malte -- [ signature omitted ]
Hi Malte, Malte Witt wrote: > Hey Muhammad, > MinGW32 g++ IS slower than the M$ compiler. This is true and will probably > always be. My very own experience is, that it gets many times faster if > you put adequate memory into your machine. Besides - what version of g++ > are you using (Try "g++ --version" on command line)? > I'm using this version: C:\MinGW\bin>g++ --version g++ (GCC) 3.4.2 (mingw-special) > I get reasonable speed with MinGW32-g++ 4.1.2 ... of course I am using > precompiled headers to increase speed even more :-) > how i can use pre-compiled headers > Comparing to a JAVA-Compiler does not give any usable information. It's > like comparing apples to pears. ;-) > I'm sorry for this comparing, but i was Java programmer, moved to C++ from 2 days, when i heard that Trolltech produced eclipse integrated plug-in for C++ ;-) I tried to use QT before, but i couldn't accustomed with it because of there is no good IDE support it, but right now "eclipse+QT integrated plug-in" make programming world much easier specially for rapid programming. > Regards, > Malte > -- [ signature omitted ]
> C:\MinGW\bin>g++ --version > g++ (GCC) 3.4.2 (mingw-special) Should be alright ... > how i can use pre-compiled headers This is handled by qmake/make/gcc/g++ for you. You have to adjust you .pro file though. The whole thing is described here: http://doc.trolltech.com/4.3/qmake-precompiledheaders.html Don't worry - it's just a matter of writing one header file and adding two lines in the .pro file :-) You do not have to edit any other source files - g++ will do the rest for you :-) Tip: Instead of adding every single Qt-Class to your stable header you can also just add the "module-headers" like QtCore or QtGui - that's working great as well. > I'm sorry for this comparing, but i was Java programmer, moved to > C++ from 2 days, when i heard that Trolltech produced eclipse > integrated plug-in for C++ ;-) :-) Regards, Malte -- [ signature omitted ]
On October 4, 2007 04:24:12 am Malte Witt wrote: > > MinGW32 g++ IS slower than the M$ compiler. This is true and will probably > always be. My very own experience is, that it gets many times faster if > you put adequate memory into your machine. Besides - what version of g++ > are you using (Try "g++ --version" on command line)? > > I get reasonable speed with MinGW32-g++ 4.1.2 ... of course I am using > precompiled headers to increase speed even more :-) It is definitely true that g++ is slower than MS's compiler. However, at least in Linux, you can set it up to use ccache and distcc and any spare machines you have sitting around to easily build a compile farm. It can result in some fairly significant speed increases. Plus, of course, it is easy to use multiple CPUs with g++ and GNU Make. Last time I checked on Windows, you could only easily do serial compiles, though this may not be true any more. -- [ signature omitted ]
Chris Thompson schrieb: > ... > easy to use multiple CPUs with g++ and GNU Make. Last time I checked on > Windows, you could only easily do serial compiles, though this may not be > true any more. At least with Visual Studio 2005 you can set the maximum numbers of parallel builds under: Options/Projects and Solutions/Build and Run/[maximum numbers...] When I installed VS2005 it was set to 2, but obviously this feature is/was very buggy: A DLL depending on another was compiled more quickly than its dependency DLL and the linker claimed "Cannot open Foo.lib" (Foo being the dependency) and the whole compilation aborted with a linker error! So I set it back to 1. Note that I tried to reproduce this buggy behaviour with a small sample project (with libraries A and B, B depending on A, A containing hundreds of dummy code and B only a few lines of code, in the hope it would compile quicker than A), but it seemed to be specific to this other project where it failed. I haven't checked with SP1 installed though since we are using IncrediBuild now anyway which puts the compile jobs on remote machines as well... Cheers, Oliver -- [ signature omitted ]