Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #4168 > unrolled thread

What good C compilers are available for Linux/UNIX?

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c

Contents

  What good C compilers are available for Linux/UNIX? Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201105.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2011-05-17 19:36 +0200
    Re: What good C compilers are available for Linux/UNIX? Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-05-17 18:32 +0000
    Re: What good C compilers are available for Linux/UNIX? William Ahern <william@wilbur.25thandClement.com> - 2011-05-17 11:50 -0700
      Re: What good C compilers are available for Linux/UNIX? August Karlstrom <fusionfile@gmail.com> - 2011-05-17 21:19 +0200
        Re: What good C compilers are available for Linux/UNIX? Ralph Spitzner <rasp@spitzner.org> - 2011-05-18 11:35 +0200
      Re: What good C compilers are available for Linux/UNIX? Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2011-05-18 13:19 +0200
    Re: What good C compilers are available for Linux/UNIX? jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-05-17 21:35 +0200
      Re: What good C compilers are available for Linux/UNIX? Mickey Mouse <fake@email.com> - 2011-05-17 13:43 -0700
        Re: What good C compilers are available for Linux/UNIX? jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-05-17 22:59 +0200
          Re: What good C compilers are available for Linux/UNIX? Mickey Mouse <fake@email.com> - 2011-05-17 22:34 -0700
      Re: What good C compilers are available for Linux/UNIX? Angel <angel+news@spamcop.net> - 2011-05-17 20:51 +0000
        Re: What good C compilers are available for Linux/UNIX? jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-05-17 23:04 +0200
          Re: What good C compilers are available for Linux/UNIX? Angel <angel+news@spamcop.net> - 2011-05-17 21:14 +0000
            Re: What good C compilers are available for Linux/UNIX? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-05-17 14:55 -0700
        Re: What good C compilers are available for Linux/UNIX? Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2011-05-19 00:13 +0200
          Re: What good C compilers are available for Linux/UNIX? Angel <angel+news@spamcop.net> - 2011-05-19 06:52 +0000

#4168 — What good C compilers are available for Linux/UNIX?

Is there a list of good C compilers for Linux and UNIX? I know about gcc and
Solaris Studio. Are there any more worth looking into? I'm not concerned
about portability. Looking for correctness, standards conformance, maturity,
and intelligent presentation of options (not kitchen sink like gcc etc).

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#4172

On 2011-05-17, Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201105.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote:
> Is there a list of good C compilers for Linux and UNIX? I know about gcc and
> Solaris Studio. Are there any more worth looking into? I'm not concerned
> about portability. Looking for correctness, standards conformance, maturity,
> and intelligent presentation of options (not kitchen sink like gcc etc).

In practice, all I've seen anyone use is whatever the vendor's compiler is,
gcc, and maybe Intel's compiler for x86.  Try a Unix programming group,
maybe?

FWIW, I don't know that "intelligent presentation of options" is specific
enough to be actionable.

-s
-- 
Copyright 2011, all wrongs reversed.  Peter Seebach / usenet-nospam@seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
I am not speaking for my employer, although they do rent some of my opinions.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4174

Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201105.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote:
> Is there a list of good C compilers for Linux and UNIX? I know about gcc and
> Solaris Studio. Are there any more worth looking into? I'm not concerned
> about portability. Looking for correctness, standards conformance, maturity,
> and intelligent presentation of options (not kitchen sink like gcc etc).

	http://clang.llvm.org/
	http://www.comeaucomputing.com/
	http://pcc.ludd.ltu.se/
	http://bellard.org/tcc/

PCC claims full C99 conformance, perhaps excluding those parts which are the
purview of the library. clang is now the default compiler on OS X. As for
intelligent presentation of options... you'd have to judge yourself.

TinyCC is interesting for it's runtime bounds checking mode.

I've never used Comeau Computing's compiler.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4176

On 2011-05-17 20:50, William Ahern wrote:
> Fritz Wuehler<fritz@spamexpire-201105.rodent.frell.theremailer.net>  wrote:
>> Is there a list of good C compilers for Linux and UNIX? I know about gcc and
>> Solaris Studio. Are there any more worth looking into? I'm not concerned
>> about portability. Looking for correctness, standards conformance, maturity,
>> and intelligent presentation of options (not kitchen sink like gcc etc).
>
> 	http://clang.llvm.org/
> 	http://www.comeaucomputing.com/
> 	http://pcc.ludd.ltu.se/
> 	http://bellard.org/tcc/
>
> PCC claims full C99 conformance, perhaps excluding those parts which are the
> purview of the library. clang is now the default compiler on OS X.

Clang give excellent error messages. For example, try to compile this 
program with gcc and then with clang and see for yourself:

struct t {
	int n;
}

int main(void)
{
	return 0;
}


/August

-- 
The competent programmer is fully aware of the limited size of his own 
skull. He therefore approaches his task with full humility, and avoids 
clever tricks like the plague. --Edsger Dijkstra

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4216

August Karlstrom wrote:

> Clang give excellent error messages. For example, try to compile this
> program with gcc and then with clang and see for yourself:
>
> struct t {
> int n;
> }
>
> int main(void)
> {
> return 0;
> }
>
>
> /August
>


Well, gcc tels you you're missing something _before_
the declaration of main.
For which I don't need a compiler because it's clear to see
what's wrong.

struct somename { sometype somename; ); [semicolon here]

So perhaps actually _reading_ books was worth it :-P

	-rasp

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4221

William Ahern <william@wilbur.25thandClement.com> wrote:

> Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201105.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote:
> > Is there a list of good C compilers for Linux and UNIX? I know about gcc and
> > Solaris Studio. Are there any more worth looking into? I'm not concerned
> > about portability. Looking for correctness, standards conformance, maturity,
> > and intelligent presentation of options (not kitchen sink like gcc etc).
> 
> 	http://clang.llvm.org/
> 	http://www.comeaucomputing.com/
> 	http://pcc.ludd.ltu.se/
> 	http://bellard.org/tcc/
> 
Thanks, I forgot about Tiny C I'll have a look at it again. Comeau won't
solve my issue because it uses gcc for a back end at least on Linux.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4177

Le 17/05/11 19:36, Fritz Wuehler a écrit :
> Is there a list of good C compilers for Linux and UNIX? I know about gcc and
> Solaris Studio. Are there any more worth looking into? I'm not concerned
> about portability. Looking for correctness, standards conformance, maturity,
> and intelligent presentation of options (not kitchen sink like gcc etc).
>

The best compiler for linux is obviously Intel's compiler.
The fastest generated code as any benchmark will confirm you.

It has full compatibility with gcc. It is the best solution.

jacob

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4186

On Tue, 17 May 2011 21:35:30 +0200, jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net>
wrote:

>The best compiler for linux is obviously Intel's compiler.
>The fastest generated code as any benchmark will confirm you.
>
>It has full compatibility with gcc. It is the best solution.

http://www.osnews.com/story/22683/Intel_Forced_to_Remove_Cripple_AMD_Function_from_Compiler_

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4188

Le 17/05/11 22:43, Mickey Mouse a écrit :
> On Tue, 17 May 2011 21:35:30 +0200, jacob navia<jacob@spamsink.net>
> wrote:
>
>> The best compiler for linux is obviously Intel's compiler.
>> The fastest generated code as any benchmark will confirm you.
>>
>> It has full compatibility with gcc. It is the best solution.
>
> http://www.osnews.com/story/22683/Intel_Forced_to_Remove_Cripple_AMD_Function_from_Compiler_

Well that was more than one and half years ago, and as you say, Intel 
removed that...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4210

On Tue, 17 May 2011 22:59:09 +0200, jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net>
wrote:

>Le 17/05/11 22:43, Mickey Mouse a écrit :
>> On Tue, 17 May 2011 21:35:30 +0200, jacob navia<jacob@spamsink.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The best compiler for linux is obviously Intel's compiler.
>>> The fastest generated code as any benchmark will confirm you.
>>>
>>> It has full compatibility with gcc. It is the best solution.
>>
>> http://www.osnews.com/story/22683/Intel_Forced_to_Remove_Cripple_AMD_Function_from_Compiler_
>
>Well that was more than one and half years ago, and as you say, Intel 
>removed that...
>

What else has/could intel do  that is more subtle? With gcc you know
what you are getting.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4187

On 2011-05-17, jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> wrote:
>
> The best compiler for linux is obviously Intel's compiler.
> The fastest generated code as any benchmark will confirm you.
>
> It has full compatibility with gcc. It is the best solution.

Only if you actually run Linux on Intel. Linux isn't bound to a single
platform and will also run on Sparc, PowerPC and MIPS, just to name a
few.

The best general purpose compiler for Linux and most other Unixes is
still gcc, IMHO. The kernel and most libraries are made with gcc, so it
is the most compatible, and it is available for free on pretty much
every platform imaginable.


-- 
"C provides a programmer with more than enough rope to hang himself.
C++ provides a firing squad, blindfold and last cigarette."
- seen in comp.lang.c

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4189

Le 17/05/11 22:51, Angel a écrit :
> On 2011-05-17, jacob navia<jacob@spamsink.net>  wrote:
>>
>> The best compiler for linux is obviously Intel's compiler.
>> The fastest generated code as any benchmark will confirm you.
>>
>> It has full compatibility with gcc. It is the best solution.
>
> Only if you actually run Linux on Intel. Linux isn't bound to a single
> platform and will also run on Sparc,

Sun compilers are the best there

  PowerPC

For PowerPc IBM's compiler is the best. It has a lot of really specific
options for the processor, and gcc is awful. I never could compile 
really big programs without hitting a code generation bug in that
platform (AIX). I compiled a Database code in C++ and the only compiler
that compiled all the code was IBM's. Maybe under linux gcc is
better. In any case it can probably compile the kernel without
getting into a bug.

and MIPS,

MIPS I do not know. Probably gcc is good enough for that
platform.

just to name a
> few.
>

I think you named all, or almost all.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4191

On 2011-05-17, jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> wrote:
> Le 17/05/11 22:51, Angel a ?crit :
>> On 2011-05-17, jacob navia<jacob@spamsink.net>  wrote:
>>>
>>> The best compiler for linux is obviously Intel's compiler.
>>> The fastest generated code as any benchmark will confirm you.
>>>
>>> It has full compatibility with gcc. It is the best solution.
>>
>> Only if you actually run Linux on Intel. Linux isn't bound to a single
>> platform and will also run on Sparc,
>
> Sun compilers are the best there

I'm talking about Linux on Sparc, not about Sun Solaris.

>   PowerPC
>
> For PowerPc IBM's compiler is the best. It has a lot of really specific
> options for the processor, and gcc is awful. I never could compile 
> really big programs without hitting a code generation bug in that
> platform (AIX). I compiled a Database code in C++ and the only compiler
> that compiled all the code was IBM's. Maybe under linux gcc is
> better. In any case it can probably compile the kernel without
> getting into a bug.

Not probably, definitely. The Linux kernel is fully supported on
PowerPC.

> and MIPS,
>
> MIPS I do not know. Probably gcc is good enough for that
> platform.
>
> just to name a
>> few.
>>
>
> I think you named all, or almost all.

On the contrary, I barely scratched the surface. It is possible to run
Linux on pretty much anything that has a CPU, like embedded systems,
mobile phones, game consoles and mainframes.

Anyway, I think we should stop here. After all this isn't comp.os.linux.


-- 
"C provides a programmer with more than enough rope to hang himself.
C++ provides a firing squad, blindfold and last cigarette."
- seen in comp.lang.c

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4195

Angel <angel+news@spamcop.net> writes:
> On 2011-05-17, jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> wrote:
>> Le 17/05/11 22:51, Angel a ?crit :
[...]
>>> Only if you actually run Linux on Intel. Linux isn't bound to a single
>>> platform and will also run on Sparc,
>>
>> Sun compilers are the best there
>
> I'm talking about Linux on Sparc, not about Sun Solaris.

Oracle Studio (formerly Sun Studio, the bundle that includes
Sun^H^H^HOracle's compiler) is available for Linux/x86.  I have no
information about its relative quality.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Nokia
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4252

Angel <angel+news@spamcop.net> wrote:

> On 2011-05-17, jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> wrote:
> >
> > The best compiler for linux is obviously Intel's compiler.
> > The fastest generated code as any benchmark will confirm you.
> >
> > It has full compatibility with gcc. It is the best solution.
> 
> Only if you actually run Linux on Intel. Linux isn't bound to a single
> platform and will also run on Sparc, PowerPC and MIPS, just to name a
> few.

For my purpose Jacob's post was helpful. I should have said I am asking
about Linux on Intel, you are right, Linux has spread to many
platforms. Thanks to you both.

> The best general purpose compiler for Linux and most other Unixes is
> still gcc, IMHO. The kernel and most libraries are made with gcc, so it
> is the most compatible, and it is available for free on pretty much
> every platform imaginable.

I am not saying gcc doesn't make life easy on Linux but I personally don't
like it so I am looking for an alternative. I'm sure if I was a Linux
developer I would use gcc like all the other Linux developers. I want to
develop on Linux but I don't ever want to be a Linux developer.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4298

On 2011-05-18, Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
> Angel <angel+news@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
>> On 2011-05-17, jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> wrote:
>> >
>> > The best compiler for linux is obviously Intel's compiler.
>> > The fastest generated code as any benchmark will confirm you.
>> >
>> > It has full compatibility with gcc. It is the best solution.
>> 
>> Only if you actually run Linux on Intel. Linux isn't bound to a single
>> platform and will also run on Sparc, PowerPC and MIPS, just to name a
>> few.
>
> For my purpose Jacob's post was helpful. I should have said I am asking
> about Linux on Intel, you are right, Linux has spread to many
> platforms. Thanks to you both.

You're quite welcome. Of course, if you write your programs in such a
way that only Intel's compiler can compile them you will lose
portability, but it is up to you to decide if that is an issue or not.

>> The best general purpose compiler for Linux and most other Unixes is
>> still gcc, IMHO. The kernel and most libraries are made with gcc, so it
>> is the most compatible, and it is available for free on pretty much
>> every platform imaginable.
>
> I am not saying gcc doesn't make life easy on Linux but I personally don't
> like it so I am looking for an alternative. I'm sure if I was a Linux
> developer I would use gcc like all the other Linux developers. I want to
> develop on Linux but I don't ever want to be a Linux developer.

Well, I just wanted to put my $0.02 in and point out the merits of gcc, but
my personal philosophy has always been "use whatever works right for you".
I am a bit of a Linux enthousiast and an scratching the surface of kernel
programming, but I refuse to take part in the holy wars on which OS, distro,
editor or compiler is best.


-- 
"C provides a programmer with more than enough rope to hang himself.
C++ provides a firing squad, blindfold and last cigarette."
- seen in comp.lang.c

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c

csiph-web