Compiler Startup

[Tom Clydesdale]

I haven't done any programming for a considerable time and would like to
pick it up again. I've loaded what I think are the GCC and GPC compilers
with no apparent problems. However, I can't find the darned things!!

Can someone give me a clue as to how they can be initiated - I would have
anticipated their appearance in a "Path" file at least. Also appreciated
would be the location of the documentation files which I also think were
installed.

TIA
Tom

[Alexander Koch]

Hello Tom,

usually the GCC and GPC executable files will be installed under /usr/bin

This directory is in the PATH so you can just execute these files from
the command line by typing "gcc" or "gpc". If this doesn't work, have a
look at you path variable with the command

echo $PATH

or look in the /usr/bin directory with

ls /usr/bin/g?c

UNIX Documentation files comes in the form of man(nual) and/or info pages.

The command

man gcc

respectively

info gcc

should do the trick. Or where you talking about system documentation for
programming?

I hope that helps.

Alex

Tom Clydesdale schrieb:

> I haven't done any programming for a considerable time and would like to
> pick it up again. I've loaded what I think are the GCC and GPC compilers
> with no apparent problems. However, I can't find the darned things!!
>
> Can someone give me a clue as to how they can be initiated - I would have
> anticipated their appearance in a "Path" file at least. Also appreciated
> would be the location of the documentation files which I also think were
> installed.
>
> TIA
> Tom

[Eric Meyers]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 2006-04-07, Tom Clydesdale <t.clydes@comcast.net> wrote:

> I haven't done any programming for a considerable time and would like to
> pick it up again. I've loaded what I think are the GCC and GPC compilers
> with no apparent problems. However, I can't find the darned things!!
>
> Can someone give me a clue as to how they can be initiated - I would have
> anticipated their appearance in a "Path" file at least. Also appreciated
> would be the location of the documentation files which I also think were
> installed.
>
> TIA
> Tom

Use which, as in ...

which gcc

or even better
slocate gcc

Eric

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFENxc6cLztWWU+V+oRAuWHAKCjCrjXhqmaZkr2Nw1RnH uTUEWyzgCcDRJL
EJLDsjqKtt2Cynd9/MkXm9o=
=kjvZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Tom Clydesdale]

On Fri, 07 Apr 2006 20:51:53 -0500, Eric Meyers wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 2006-04-07, Tom Clydesdale <t.clydes@comcast.net> wrote:

>> I haven't done any programming for a considerable time and would like to
>> pick it up again. I've loaded what I think are the GCC and GPC compilers
>> with no apparent problems. However, I can't find the darned things!!
>>
>> Can someone give me a clue as to how they can be initiated - I would have
>> anticipated their appearance in a "Path" file at least. Also appreciated
>> would be the location of the documentation files which I also think were
>> installed.
>>
>> TIA
>> Tom

>
> Use which, as in ...
>
> which gcc
>
> or even better
> slocate gcc
>
> Eric
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFENxc6cLztWWU+V+oRAuWHAKCjCrjXhqmaZkr2Nw1RnH uTUEWyzgCcDRJL
> EJLDsjqKtt2Cynd9/MkXm9o=
> =kjvZ
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Thank you gentlemen you gave me the mental clue for proceeding - my
problem turned out to be semantics (?) in that both programs require the
version number as part of the program name (ie. gcc-4.0). Without version
number they remain unknown.

With all my attempts to install gcc I wound up with 3 versions loaded
(272, 3.4 & 4.0) and I wonder which might be most desirable since ubuntu
seems to consider all as "current".

Again many thanks,
Tom

[Shea Martin]

Tom Clydesdale wrote:

> On Fri, 07 Apr 2006 20:51:53 -0500, Eric Meyers wrote:
>

>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 2006-04-07, Tom Clydesdale <t.clydes@comcast.net> wrote:

>>> I haven't done any programming for a considerable time and would like to
>>> pick it up again. I've loaded what I think are the GCC and GPC compilers
>>> with no apparent problems. However, I can't find the darned things!!
>>>
>>> Can someone give me a clue as to how they can be initiated - I would have
>>> anticipated their appearance in a "Path" file at least. Also appreciated
>>> would be the location of the documentation files which I also think were
>>> installed.
>>>
>>> TIA
>>> Tom

>> Use which, as in ...
>>
>> which gcc
>>
>> or even better
>> slocate gcc
>>
>> Eric
>>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
>>
>> iD8DBQFENxc6cLztWWU+V+oRAuWHAKCjCrjXhqmaZkr2Nw1RnH uTUEWyzgCcDRJL
>> EJLDsjqKtt2Cynd9/MkXm9o=
>> =kjvZ
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

>
> Thank you gentlemen you gave me the mental clue for proceeding - my
> problem turned out to be semantics (?) in that both programs require the
> version number as part of the program name (ie. gcc-4.0). Without version
> number they remain unknown.
>
> With all my attempts to install gcc I wound up with 3 versions loaded
> (272, 3.4 & 4.0) and I wonder which might be most desirable since ubuntu
> seems to consider all as "current".
>
> Again many thanks,
> Tom
>

IMHO, unless you have a reason not to, use 4.0, or whatever the latest
is. Using a makefile or IDE which handles the makefile for you will
save you the grunt work of manually calling g++ mycodefile.cpp for all
your files.

~S

[Tom Clydesdale]

>>> On 2006-04-07, Tom Clydesdale <t.clydes@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>> I haven't done any programming for a considerable time and would like to
>>>> pick it up again. I've loaded what I think are the GCC and GPC compilers
>>>> with no apparent problems. However, I can't find the darned things!!
>>>>
>>>> Can someone give me a clue as to how they can be initiated - I would have
>>>> anticipated their appearance in a "Path" file at least. Also appreciated
>>>> would be the location of the documentation files which I also think were
>>>> installed.
>>>>
>>>> TIA
>>>> Tom

>

Well, I got it loaded, installed a link to the program and tried to run a
very small test - the file <stdio> appears to be missing! I've checked
all the specified files seem to be loaded - can someone point me in the
correct direction?

TIA Tom

[Richard]

"Tom"posted the following on 2006-04-08:

> On Fri, 07 Apr 2006 20:51:53 -0500, Eric Meyers wrote:
>

>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 2006-04-07, Tom Clydesdale <t.clydes@comcast.net> wrote:

>>> I haven't done any programming for a considerable time and would like to
>>> pick it up again. I've loaded what I think are the GCC and GPC compilers
>>> with no apparent problems. However, I can't find the darned things!!
>>>
>>> Can someone give me a clue as to how they can be initiated - I would have
>>> anticipated their appearance in a "Path" file at least. Also appreciated
>>> would be the location of the documentation files which I also think were
>>> installed.
>>>
>>> TIA
>>> Tom

>>
>> Use which, as in ...
>>
>> which gcc
>>
>> or even better
>> slocate gcc
>>
>> Eric
>>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
>>
>> iD8DBQFENxc6cLztWWU+V+oRAuWHAKCjCrjXhqmaZkr2Nw1RnH uTUEWyzgCcDRJL
>> EJLDsjqKtt2Cynd9/MkXm9o=
>> =kjvZ
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

>
> Thank you gentlemen you gave me the mental clue for proceeding - my
> problem turned out to be semantics (?) in that both programs require the
> version number as part of the program name (ie. gcc-4.0). Without version
> number they remain unknown.
>

No they dont : go to the synaptic package manager and install
"gcc" and just type "gcc" at the command line.

[R]

sudo apt-get install build-essentia

[Alexander Koch]

R schrieb:

> sudo apt-get install build-essentia

there is an "l" missing

sudo apt-get install build-essential

[Centurion]

Tom Clydesdale wrote:

>

>>>> On 2006-04-07, Tom Clydesdale <t.clydes@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>> I haven't done any programming for a considerable time and would like
>>>>> to
>>>>> pick it up again. I've loaded what I think are the GCC and GPC
>>>>> compilers
>>>>> with no apparent problems. However, I can't find the darned things!!
>>>>>
>>>>> Can someone give me a clue as to how they can be initiated - I would
>>>>> have
>>>>> anticipated their appearance in a "Path" file at least. Also
>>>>> appreciated would be the location of the documentation files which I
>>>>> also think were installed.
>>>>>
>>>>> TIA
>>>>> Tom

>
>

>>

> Well, I got it loaded, installed a link to the program and tried to run a
> very small test - the file <stdio> appears to be missing! I've checked
> all the specified files seem to be loaded - can someone point me in the
> correct direction?
>
> TIA Tom

FWIW, there is no such thing as <stdio>. There's these options:
#include <stdio.h> // for C programs
#include <cstdio> // for C++ programs

In short, C includes are the same as they always were. C++ including C
libraries drop the ".h" suffix and add a "c" to the front. So <stdio.h>
becomes <cstdio>, <math.h> becomes <cmath>, etc. This naming convention
DOESN'T apply to system-specific headers though, like <sys/socket.h> remain
the same for both C and C++. Confused? ;)

Another gotcha with C++ is that if you've been out of the saddle a while,
you'll find the compiler doesn't assume you're using the standard namespace
so a lot of "old code" simply wont compile on newer compilers (or wont
compile without complaining bitterly). So to get around it you need to
add:

using namespace std; // after the includes and before main()

So the obligatory "Hello World!" app written in C++ these days looks like
this:

#include <iostream>
using namespace std;

int main(void){
cout << "Hello World!" << endl;
return 0;
}

The same thing without the namespace declaration looks like this:
....
std::cout << "Hello World!" << std::endl;
....

See the difference?

HTH,

James
--
America's best buy for a quarter is a telephone call to the right person.