 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I was wondering which compilers are either supported or used by the
POV-Team at the moment? (No, I don't want product support on a
compiler. I just want to know which ones work best for compiling
POV-Ray. )
I'm primarily interested in compiling for Windows (either GUI, or
command line), and perhaps the Linux or DOS platforms.
Specifically, I want a compiler that will compile version 3.5 easily,
and without any tweaking or editing. I don't want to write make files
or anything like that. (Yes, I know that I'll have to wait till the
3.5 source is made public. I'm trying to think in advance and be
prepared for the event.)
The ease of code editing and compilation are more important to me than
the actual target platform. Whatever the target platform is, it just
needs to run on an Athlon-based PC.
I currently happen to have a copy of Borland's C++ Builder Pro 4.0,
that I got from a magazine cover. I have no idea if this would compile
POV smoothly. (I doubt it would be easy.)
Also, since some compilers come in different variations, such as
learning, basic, pro, or corporate enterprise editions. Please let me
know what is the minumum investment I'll need to make, to compile POV
with ease.
Thanks so much,
Glen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 25 Apr 2002 00:01:46 -0400, Glen Berry <7no### [at] ezwv com> wrote:
> I was wondering which compilers are either supported or used by the
> POV-Team at the moment?
Have you noticed 8.4 chapter of documentation ?
Not to much at this moment :-) but partial information you can also find in
8.3.1 chapter.
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Glen Berry wrote:
>
> I was wondering which compilers are either supported or used by the
> POV-Team at the moment? (No, I don't want product support on a
> compiler. I just want to know which ones work best for compiling
> POV-Ray. )
>
> I'm primarily interested in compiling for Windows (either GUI, or
> command line), and perhaps the Linux or DOS platforms.
> Specifically, I want a compiler that will compile version 3.5 easily,
> and without any tweaking or editing. I don't want to write make files
> or anything like that. (Yes, I know that I'll have to wait till the
> 3.5 source is made public. I'm trying to think in advance and be
> prepared for the event.)
>
> [...]
Povray for Windows is currently compiled with MSVC 6 and the Intel C
compiler, there is some further information on this in the docs like ABX
said.
If you don't need the GUI you can use any C compiler, i have not tried
Borland, but it should function too (just need to write your own
makefile). For using GCC see:
http://www-public.tu-bs.de:8080/~y0013390/povcyg/index.html
But note that all compilers are probably producing slower executables than
the one from Intel, no matter if AMD or Intel CPU.
For Linux GCC is obviously the most common compiler, but ICC should work
too and could be faster (i have not tried it yet though) Mark Gordon said
he will maybe try it for the official Linux version.
Povray 3.5 will require a C++ compiler.
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, IsoWood include,
TransSkin and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 20 Apr. 2002 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christoph Hormann wrote:
>
> For Linux GCC is obviously the most common compiler, but ICC should work
> too and could be faster (i have not tried it yet though)
I've compared gcc 2.95.3, gcc 3.0.1, icc 5.0 and icc 6.0. It turned out
that gcc 3.0.1 produced the fastest code. That's strange, because others
reported that the code by icc is significantly faster and also that
gcc 3.0 produces slower code than gcc 2.95. If someone can prove me
wrong, I would be pleased to get the compiler switches. Currently,
my guess is that the outcome depends on the processor. I'm using a
mobile Pentium III whereas the others used a Pentium 4.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
