What C compiler to use?

[guy lateur]

I've installed the aforementioned sasc658, and the manuals (2 volumes/.txt files) seem to be lacking the 'displays' (figures). Am I doing something wrong? I've tried MultiView and the SAS/C editor.

Is there any version version of these manuals that do include the figures? Eg, a .pdf would be great!

[guy lateur]

Hurray!

[idrougge]

Figures?

[guy lateur]

Like here (Manual Volume 1, Part 1, Chapter 2):



Surely there should be some kind of screenshot there?

[Leffmann]

Maybe there's something better than plain-text docs here:

http://amiga-manuals.xiik.net/index.php
http://www.bombjack.org/amiga/index.htm

[idrougge]

Lattice C is the predecessor of SAS/C, and Bombjack has the manual set for that one.

[guy lateur]

Ok I see, I'll check out the Lattice manual, thanks!
Nice links, btw, looks like there's a ton of info there.

[modrobert]

Volume 1 of the manual for the primary Amiga C compiler for most of the 1990s. Updated for version 6.5.

SAS/C Development System User's Guide, Volume 1: Introduction, Compiler, Editor, Version 6

https://archive.org/details/sasc-650-vol1

Volume 2 of the user's guide for the primary Amiga C compiler for most of the 1990s. Covers version 6.5.

SAS/C Development System User's Guide, Volume 2: Debugger, Utilities, Assembler, Version 6

https://archive.org/details/sasc-650-vol2

[guy lateur]

Originally Posted by modrobert

https://archive.org/details/sasc-650-vol1

https://archive.org/details/sasc-650-vol2

As much as I would have liked this to be the pdf's I was looking for, unfortunately they aren't. The missing screenshot I mentioned (Display 2.1) is readable, but the 3 following ones are so blurred they are unusable.

Thanks for the effort, though!

[modrobert]

Originally Posted by guy lateur

As much as I would have liked this to be the pdf's I was looking for, unfortunately they aren't. The missing screenshot I mentioned (Display 2.1) is readable, but the 3 following ones are so blurred they are unusable.

Thanks for the effort, though!

Those are the correct manuals, even if the embedded screenshots are bad quality in the PDF version.

There are deliberate errors in the first few examples which can be a bit confusing, part of the learning experience is to correct those in order to get familiar with the IDE. Perhaps not the brightest idea since many users try the included examples as a way to test if the compiler is installed correctly before even opening the manual, and they are in for a surprise.

I suggest you download the file called "GENERIC RAW BOOK ZIP", it's a bit better there, screens are barely readable.

[guy lateur]

Originally Posted by modrobert

I suggest you download the file called "GENERIC RAW BOOK ZIP", it's a bit better there, screens are barely readable.

Indeed, they're almost readable in that version! I guess I'll be using them together; there's not a lot of screens, anyway. Thanks again!

[Doc Mindie]

Thread Necro Incorporated

What is the biggest pluses and minuses between the c compilers?
SAS/C
Dice
Vbcc
Gcc
Storm
HiSoft

(And probably others I've not thought of)

Just fancy a breakdown of these to get a general idea.

I got a book (Complete Amiga C by Cliff Ramshaw) which references Dice and apparently came with a full registered version of it. Haven't got the disks but you know.....

I will NOT under any circumstance be doing any coding on a different computer, it's only on the Amiga I want. A1200 with 68030@40 MHz, 127MB Fast, several GB HD

[plasmab]

Originally Posted by Doc Mindie

Thread Necro Incorporated

What is the biggest pluses and minuses between the c compilers?
SAS/C
Dice
Vbcc
Gcc
Storm
HiSoft

(And probably others I've not thought of)

Just fancy a breakdown of these to get a general idea.

I got a book (Complete Amiga C by Cliff Ramshaw) which references Dice and apparently came with a full registered version of it. Haven't got the disks but you know.....

I will NOT under any circumstance be doing any coding on a different computer, it's only on the Amiga I want. A1200 with 68030@40 MHz, 127MB Fast, several GB HD

Only my opinion but I’d only use VBCC or GCC for new projects. Because they are supported and maintained. SAS/C would be my backup choice because I happen to have worked at SAS and with the last maintainer of the product.

I’d never do coding on the target machine though.

GCC is a bit more heavyweight but allows the porting of Unix apps. VBCC is lightweight and available for many architectures.

[meynaf]

Sas/C is the most Amiga friendly, relatively easy to use (once you know how to setup a new project).
Vbcc is good with standards and easy to setup ; also actively maintained.
Gcc is for Unix stuff ; generates its own object format and not generally user friendly (but is supposed to produce good code).
HiSoft cpp has integrated IDE, is very friendly, compiles fast, but not good with current standards and sometimes a little on the buggy side.

I don't usually code in C (especially not for Amiga apps) and my typical use is to compile current code and then step-by-step convert into handwritten asm.
But if faced the need to write portable code i'd use VS2015 to make it work, then vbcc to build the 68k version.

[Daedalus]

Originally Posted by Doc Mindie

I got a book (Complete Amiga C by Cliff Ramshaw) which references Dice and apparently came with a full registered version of it. Haven't got the disks but you know.....

Dice C wasn't that bad actually (and that's a pretty good book - have it and the disks myself), so if you did want it, the disk images from the book are here. There's also a slightly updated version available on Aminet here. However, I would agree with plasmab in that both GCC and VBCC have been updated a lot since then, so might be a better option if you're going to be doing anything serious. The vast majority of the material in the book will be the same across all the compilers anyway, with only minor tweaks needed regarding compiler-specific things.

[Marlon_]

Originally Posted by meynaf

Gcc is for Unix stuff ; generates its own object format and not generally user friendly (but is supposed to produce good code).

Bebbo made the new GCC-6 compiler compile directly as HUNK format instead of ELF, also produces probably the best 68k binaries to date because of all the optimizations he's made. One big plus with it is that you can get help from Bebbo if you get stuck.

The biggest con is that you can't use it to compile ON the target machine, but it's really well made for cross compiling and it supports live debugging with GDB.

[meynaf]

Originally Posted by Marlon_

Bebbo made the new GCC-6 compiler compile directly as HUNK format instead of ELF, also produces probably the best 68k binaries to date because of all the optimizations he's made. One big plus with it is that you can get help from Bebbo if you get stuck.

I wasn't talking about the executable format, but the object files. Does GCC-6 produce AmigaOS object files that any linker will accept as input ?

[plasmab]

Originally Posted by meynaf

I wasn't talking about the executable format, but the object files. Does GCC-6 produce AmigaOS object files that any linker will accept as input ?

I believe GCC6 still produces elf as the intermediary format. But vlink can take elf and HUNK if you don’t mind using it as a linker. I have never tried this though.

[nogginthenog]

Originally Posted by Marlon_

The biggest con is that you can't use it to compile ON the target machine, but it's really well made for cross compiling and it supports live debugging with GDB.

GCC 6 cannot be used on the target machine but older versions like 2.95 could.

In theory you could compile GCC for the Amiga if it supports ixemul. I got a PI version running with minimal hacking. Sort of. It kept running out of RAM but eventually produced something that could generate 68k.

[kolla]

It's about time someone set up "cross-builder environments for Amiga as a service" in the cloud. Then one can write code on the Amiga and just "toss it up there" for compilation, and quickly receive an lha with (if you are lucky) finished binaries etc. and a build log.