looking for a free basic compiler

[Torben]

Or PASCAL++ (MODULA2) .....

Modula 2 is perhaps the only language I have ever actually hated (although I am no Java fan, either). Perhaps its sole saving grace over Pascal was its module system, and Borland's approach to units with Turbo Pascal worked well enough for that anyway. I must say though that a large part of my distaste was simply that TP had a much larger user base on the net at the time (circa '93-'95) and also had the SWAG, which was absolutely killer.

Sadly, we had to submit course work in Modula 2 for a couple of my university classes. I wrote a Turbo Pascal to Modula 2 translator so I could write my projects in Pascal and submit them in Modula 2.

@Nigel: I remember the speed thing too. I absolutely could not imagine what on earth was wrong with C compilers--after years of compiling large TP programs in a second or two, finding that C took minutes to compile the same programs drove me nuts. And the executables created by TP were tiny compared to those produced by C compilers, too.


Torben

 

[BeeBop]

Modula 2 is perhaps the only language I have ever actually hated

Sadly, we had to submit course work in Modula 2 for a couple of my university classes. I wrote a Turbo Pascal to Modula 2 translator so I could write my projects in Pascal and submit them in Modula 2.

Torben

My own experience is not so different. I did my homework in PASCAL (on a Mac at that time, and there was no MODULA compiler for the mac) then uploaded it to the work-farm and edited it with vi (I know you would take emacs any day) and got it to compile by command line (there were no GUI on the internet at that time, and there was only dial up in Canada.)

When I did my work in the lab, on a spark station, I couldn't believe how slow it was, compared to my Symantec PASCAL.

 

[arrie]

Nigel said:
Love Pascal, or at least Borland's Turbo Pascal - you could see why it's called 'Turbo' if you switch to a Microsoft compiler

Face it Borland is/was always on fire when it's about swift working software.
Delphi itself rocks. I still use version 7 myself, will find it tough to go somewhere else.
Borland even outdone MS with their own .net
I've just never been fond of their BDE, seen too much pletsing from my vehicle tracking days.

Sadly the uninformed world population would not see it that way, they've chosen Macroflop.

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

@Nigel: I remember the speed thing too. I absolutely could not imagine what on earth was wrong with C compilers--after years of compiling large TP programs in a second or two, finding that C took minutes to compile the same programs drove me nuts. And the executables created by TP were tiny compared to those produced by C compilers, too.

Yes, one reason I never got into C, it was just too slow - although the Turbo C compiler was much faster than the Microsoft one, but still far slower than Turbo Pascal.

 

[arrie]

I almost think there was a time when Borland gave TP7 away for free.
If you really want contact them and see if you can't get a copy of it still.
Only if you really want.

so uncle nige, what language do you use with mcu's?

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

I almost think there was a time when Borland gave TP7 away for free.

I don't recall 7 ever been free, but you can download 5 for free, from the Borland museum (and Turbo C as well).

If you really want contact them and see if you can't get a copy of it still.
Only if you really want.

so uncle nige, what language do you use with mcu's?

I use assembler, and Delphi on the PC.

 

[arrie]

Mmmmm

Now that I reflected on past experience, I think they gave a limited number TP's away to school kids some years back.
I'm unfortunately one of those guys that forked out top dollar for TP and turboC++ many moons ago.

They can actually give away seven as well, not even schools are using it any more, but it will give a lot of youngsters a huge kick-start at home.
Same with turbo C++, but damn, give them the bit later stuff to learn with.
I mean TP5, how old is that?
I can't even remember what the differences are between 5, 6 and 7.
That's how long back it is, but then again, I think I mentioned it before, I tend to show signs of alzheimers-light also.

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

I can't even remember what the differences are between 5, 6 and 7.

It's ONE and TWO respectively

 

[arrie]

Ooooof, you got me there.

 

[Torben]

I don't recall 7 ever been free, but you can download 5 for free, from the Borland museum (and Turbo C as well).



I use assembler, and Delphi on the PC.

That's what I've found. You can freely download only up to TP 5.5 as far as I can tell. Of course, you might find later versions in the torrent trackers.

I wish there were a cross-platform Delphi. I'd love that on Linux with GTK+. The languages I use for work these days are PHP, C, bash, Javascript, and a little C++. For my little 8051 projects it's been all C so far--sadly my work doesn't include microcontrollers just yet (but I do get to program for embedded Linux controllers). Assembler I am currently using mostly just to program bots for the game DroidBattles.


Torben

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

I wish there were a cross-platform Delphi. I'd love that on Linux with GTK+.

Well there is a Linux version of Delphi, and it was given away free on magazines a few years ago - I even bought the magazine just to get it.

 

[Torben]

Well there is a Linux version of Delphi, and it was given away free on magazines a few years ago - I even bought the magazine just to get it.

I think you might be talking about Kylix. I remember reading about that at some point. I really should check it out--it sounds very cool.


Torben

 

[3v0]

I started with UCSD Pascal then moved to Turbo Pascal when PC's came out.

Turbo Pascal was a fast compiler for its day. But given the speed of todays PC's compiler speed is much less of an issue.

In grad school my project generated source for Pascal, Modula2, and C. As I have said several times, they are procedural languages more alike then different. From a programers perspective most of what sets them apart is cosmetic.

 

[Torben]

I started with UCSD Pascal then moved to Turbo Pascal when PC's came out.

Turbo Pascal was a fast compiler for its day. But given the speed of todays PC's compiler speed is much less of an issue.

In grad school my project generated source for Pascal, Modula2, and C. As I have said several times, they are procedural languages more alike then different. From a programers perspective most of what sets them apart is cosmetic.

Well, the syntax is certainly the most obvious difference. Once you get past the basics, though, other differences become important. i.e. modules/units/header files and linking are all handled very differently and you need to take that into account.

Now you've got me thinking about trying to program daemons in Pascal since it often produces smaller executables and memory footprints than C. Also some of my work is in embedded Linux where fast on-board compiles can also be very nice. Seriously, though, I broadly agree with you and think that this is really kind of a silly idea.

But man, that would make my job a weird shop to get hired into these days, when Pascal almost never appears on a job description.


Torben

 

[arrie]

What got to me with doing work in multiple mediums, I would put delphi code into VB or visa versa.
That was quite irritating, never understood why I kept doing that.
I have really unlearned VB since swapping to delphi around version 4 or 5.
(Ahhh, Nigel, now I got that one right)
But I doubt whether I would go back to VB. Used to be able to do things in VB people called me names for just for trying.
The worst of it was that they could not do it to work faster using Visual C or whatever they said would do it better.
VB turned into one monster later on though, never worked with VB.net though.
I believed Delphi to be better.

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

I think you might be talking about Kylix. I remember reading about that at some point. I really should check it out--it sounds very cool.

Yes I think you're right, it may still be possible to download it for free, it was at one time.

 

[Flex]

Free online C toots.

I remember these toots back in the day........

Google "teach yourself c in"

**broken link removed**

**broken link removed**

**broken link removed**

Good Luck

 

[3v0]

I am not disputing that Pascal produces smaller objects, but I do not see why. A C compiler with a good optimizer should do as well as any Pascal compiler. I have not seen data on object code size for the various PIC compilers.

Other things advanced programmers need to watch for are things like re-entrant and recursive ability. 'Decent' in-lining of functions etc.

If I were to shift away from C it would be to give forth another go.
The last time I used it was on a Z80, but I doubt that is going to happen an time soon. If I ever get into doing serious AI again it would be my first choice.

Well, the syntax is certainly the most obvious difference. Once you get past the basics, though, other differences become important. i.e. modules/units/header files and linking are all handled very differently and you need to take that into account.

Now you've got me thinking about trying to program daemons in Pascal since it often produces smaller executables and memory footprints than C. Also some of my work is in embedded Linux where fast on-board compiles can also be very nice. Seriously, though, I broadly agree with you and think that this is really kind of a silly idea.

But man, that would make my job a weird shop to get hired into these days, when Pascal almost never appears on a job description.


Torben

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

I am not disputing that Pascal produces smaller objects, but I do not see why. A C compiler with a good optimizer should do as well as any Pascal compiler. I have not seen data on object code size for the various PIC compilers.

I suspect it's down to the debugging support, and if you disabled all debugging C would be at least as small as Pascal.

Other things advanced programmers need to watch for are things like re-entrant and recursive ability. 'Decent' in-lining of functions etc.

Such things are available in most PC HLL's, but need to be used with great care.

If I were to shift away from C it would be to give forth another go.
The last time I used it was on a Z80, but I doubt that is going to happen an time soon. If I ever get into doing serious AI again it would be my first choice.

I did Forth a long time back as well, it never impressed me very much at all.

It would be pretty pointless in this day and age to shift from C to Pascal, Pascal may be a far 'better' language, and forces good programming practice on you - but C has effectively beaten it off

 

[3v0]

I suspect it's down to the debugging support, and if you disabled all debugging C would be at least as small as Pascal.

I suspect you are right. At least one vendor I knew used a different front end and the same back end for Pascal and C.​

Such things are available in most PC HLL's, but need to be used with great care.

From what I have seen support is not uniform. For example C18 does not have inline function. Swordfish Basic does not support recursion.​

I did Forth a long time back as well, it never impressed me very much at all.

I do not know many who are luke warm about forth, often it is a love it or hate it deal. I view it as roll a your own language kit. To some extent you can do so with many languages but forth takes it to the extreme. It shines for AI work.

A few years back they dumped the screen concept. That made working with forth better. But anyone who can not get into RPN notation will always dislike forth. A few weeks ago I found a forth for the PIC18's called flash forth. Is is interpreted (compiled forth does not make much sense to me) and uses flash memory to hold the new words/code. I played with it a bit. I have forgotten much of what I knew.
​

It would be pretty pointless in this day and age to shift from C to Pascal, Pascal may be a far 'better' language, and forces good programming practice on you - but C has effectively beaten it off

I agree. For a seasoned programmer language choice is less important then people who are learning. In isolation I would much rather teach people to program in Pascal. But all the people I teach are doing embedded work so C is by far the better choice.

For PC development I like C#.