blocks|key|246760|text|它不能直接用来替代微软编译器，首先它有一组截然不同的命令行参数和编译器特定的选项。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|246761|您可以使用MinGW或Cygwin来编写软件，但会引入额外的依赖项(特别是在cygwin的情况下)。|246762|与cl相比，gcc的一个不常被吹捧的优势是，与ccache一起使用，可以极大地加快重建速度，或者使用其他几台机器作为编译器的从属来构建distcc。|246763|entityMap^0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|I|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|J|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|F|3|-4|5|6|7|K|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|G|$]]

It can't be used as a direct swap-out replacement for the microsoft compilers, for a start it has a vastly different set of command line arguments and compiler specific options.

You can make use of MinGW or Cygwin to write software but introduce extra dependencies ( especially in the case of cygwin ). 

One not often touted advantage of gcc over cl is that gcc can be used with ccache to drastically speed up rebuilds or distcc to build using several other machines as compiler slaves.

blocks|key|3141280|text|考虑将英特尔编译器(或他们似乎习惯于这样称呼的"Composer“)作为另一种选择。与MS相比，我不太确定它的C%2B%2B11支持在哪里(当然它有lambda)，但它确实与VisualStudio很好地集成在一起(例如，一个解决方案中的不同项目可以使用英特尔或MS编译器)，并且已经做出了一些努力来匹配MS编译器命令行选项。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|3141281|entityMap^0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|D|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|-4|5|6|7|E|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|C|$]]

Consider the Intel compiler (or "Composer" as they seem to have taken to calling it) as another option. I'm not too sure where its C++11 support is at compared with MS (certainly it has lambdas), but it does integrate very nicely with VisualStudio (e.g different projects within a solution can use the Intel or MS compilers) and there's also been some efforts made to match the MS compiler commandline options.

blocks|key|246793|text|对于C%2B%2B，GCC和MSVC使用了不同的名称损坏约定。由一个编译器编译的C%2B%2B+dlls不能用于使用另一个编译器编译的应用程序。我相信这是我们没有看到在windows中更广泛地使用gcc的主要原因。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|246794|entityMap^0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|D|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|-4|5|6|7|E|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|C|$]]

GCC and MSVC use different name mangling conventions for C++. C++ dlls compiled by one compiler can not be used in applications compiled with the other. I believe this is the main reason we don't see more widespread use of gcc in windows.

blocks|key|246863|text|GCC对C%2B%2B11的支持非常出色(既然已经实现了<regex>，它对标准一致性的支持也就相当不错了)。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|offset|length|style|CODE|entityRanges|data|246864|如果您更换了您的编译器，您将需要确保每个依赖项都可以使用新的编译器来构建。它们不是可替代的插件(尽管是Clang+is+working+on+becoming+that+way)。|246865|GCC是一名优秀的编译器，他可以生成性能与MSVC相当的代码，甚至更好。不过，它缺少一些低级Windows特有的功能。|246866|除此之外，我要回答你的问题：|246867|246868|要让VS使用GCC作为编译器，你几乎需要一直转向makefile或自定义构建步骤。你最好从命令行编译，使用CMake或者类似的东西。|ordered-list-item|246869|你不能使用VS调试器来调试GCC的代码。GCC输出GDB兼容的调试信息，并且VS调试格式是专有的，所以在这方面不会很快发生任何变化。|246870|代码质量正如你所希望的那样好。看上面。|246871|不，你的代码质量实际上会提高，因为GCC会指出几个假设的标准扩展MSVC会对你隐藏。所有有自尊的开源项目都可以用GCC编译。|246872|246873|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://clang.llvm.org/docs/MSVCCompatibility.html^0|O|7|0|1F|11|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|14|8|@$9|15|A|16|B|C]]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|6|7|17|8|@]|D|@$9|18|A|19|1|1A]]|E|$]]|$1|H|3|I|5|6|7|1B|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|J|3|K|5|6|7|1C|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|L|3|-4|5|6|7|1D|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|M|3|N|5|O|7|1E|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|P|3|Q|5|O|7|1F|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|R|3|S|5|O|7|1G|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|T|3|U|5|O|7|1H|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|V|3|-4|5|6|7|1I|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|W|3|-4|5|6|7|1J|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]]|X|$Y|$5|Z|10|11|E|$12|13]]]]

GCC's C++11 support is quite phenomenal (and quite up to par with standards conformance, now that <code>&lt;regex&gt;</code> has been implemented).

If you replace your compiler, you'll need to make sure every dependency can be built with that new compiler. They're not made to be substitutable plugins (although <a href="http://clang.llvm.org/docs/MSVCCompatibility.html" rel="noreferrer">Clang is working on becoming that way</a>).

GCC is a fine compiler, and can produce code that has pretty much the same performance, if not better, than MSVC. It is missing some low-level Windows-specific features though.

Apart from this, to answer your questions:

<ol>
<li>To get VS to use GCC as a compiler, you'd pretty much need to turn to makefiles or custom build steps all the way. You'd be much better off compiling from the commandline and using CMake or something similar.</li>
<li>You cannot use the VS debugger for GCC code. GCC outputs GDB compatible debug information, and the VS debug format is proprietary, so nothing will change in that area anytime soon.</li>
<li>Code quality is just as good as you'd want it. See above.</li>
<li>No, the quality of your code will actually increase, as GCC will point out several assumed standard extensions MSVC would hide from you. All self-respecting open source projects can be compiled with GCC.</li>
</ol>

blocks|key|2927048|text|MSVC有一个巨大的优势，它提供了一个在Windows下无与伦比的IDE，包括对调试器的支持。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|2927049|MinGW的最佳替代方案可能是Code::Blocks，但两者之间有很多东西，特别是在代码完成和调试器方面。|2927050|此外，MSVC允许您使用MinGW不支持的一些专有的微软内容(MFC、ATL，可能还有其他东西)，并使GDI%2B和DirectX的使用变得更容易、更直接(尽管使用MinGW也可以做到这两点)。|2927051|Cygwin，正如在另一篇文章中提到的，将有额外的依赖和可能的许可证问题(依赖是GPL，所以你的程序也必须如此)。MinGW没有任何这样的依赖或问题。|2927052|MinGW的编译速度也比MSVC慢得多(尽管预编译头文件有一点帮助)。|2927053|尽管如此，GCC/MinGW是一个完全可靠的高质量编译器，在我看来，它在生成代码的质量方面优于任何可用的MSVC版本。|2927054|在最新版本的MSVC中，这一点不太明显，但仍然可见。特别是对于任何与SSE、内部函数和内联汇编相关的东西，从那以后，GCC一直在彻底摧毁MSVC+(尽管他们正在慢慢赶上)。|2927055|在GCC中，标准遵从性也要好得多，这可能是一把双刃剑(因为它可能意味着您的一些代码不能在更符合标准的编译器上编译！)，C%2B%2B11支持也是如此。|2927056|MinGW还可以选择支持DW2异常，这与“正常”风格完全不兼容，并且在可执行文件中占用更多空间，但积极的一面是在运行时“几乎为零成本”。|2927057|entityMap^0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|T|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|U|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|V|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|6|7|W|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|H|3|I|5|6|7|X|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|J|3|K|5|6|7|Y|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|L|3|M|5|6|7|Z|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|N|3|O|5|6|7|10|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|P|3|Q|5|6|7|11|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|R|3|-4|5|6|7|12|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|S|$]]

MSVC has the huge advantage of coming with an IDE that has no equals under Windows, including debugger support.

The probably best alternative for MinGW would be Code::Blocks, but there are worlds in between, especially regarding code completion and the debugger.

Also, MSVC lets you use some proprietary Microsoft stuff (MFC, ATL, and possibly others) that MinGW has no support for, and makes using GDI+ and DirectX easier and more straightforward (though it is possible to do both with MinGW).

Cygwin, as mentioned in another post, will have extra dependencies and possible license issues (the dependency is GPL, so your programs must be, too). MinGW does not have any such dependency or issue.

MinGW also compiles significantly slower than MSVC (though precompiled headers help a little).

Despite all that, GCC/MinGW is an entirely reliable quality compiler, which in my opinion outperforms any to date available version of MSVC in terms of quality of generated code. 
This is somewhat less pronounced with the most recent versions of MSVC, but still visible. Especially for anything related to SSE, intrinsics, and inline assembly, GCC has been totally anihilating MSVC ever since (though they're slowly catching up).

Standards compliance is a lot better in GCC too, which can be a double-edged sword (because it can mean that some of your code won't compile on the more conforming compiler!), as is C++11 support.

MinGW optionally also supports DW2 exceptions, which are totally incompatible with the "normal" flavour and take more space in the executable, but on the positive side are "practically zero cost" in runtime.

blocks|key|251790|text|我想添加一些信息，因为该字段可能在提出问题后发生了更改。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|251791|从MSVC切换的主要问题是缺乏一个与MinGW完美集成的好集成开发环境。Visual+Studio是一个非常强大的工具，在相当长的一段时间内，它是Windows上唯一的播放器。然而，Jetbrains在几天前发布了他们新的C%2B%2B集成开发环境CLion的预览版。|251792|在跨平台应用程序上工作时，主要的好处就来了。在这种情况下，基于GCC的工具链可以让生活变得更容易。此外，CLion与CMake的紧密集成，与Visual+Studio相比，这也是一个很大的优势。因此，在我看来，现在考虑切换到MinGW是值得的。|251793|entityMap^0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|I|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|J|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|F|3|-4|5|6|7|K|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|G|$]]

I want to add some information because the field may have changed since the question was asked.

The main problem for switching away from MSVC was the lack of a good IDE that flawlessly integrates with MinGW . Visual Studio is a very powerful tool and was the only player on Windows for quite some time. However, Jetbrains released a preview version of their new C++ IDE CLion some days ago.

The main benefit comes when working on cross platform applications. In this case, a GCC based tool chain can make life much easier. Moreover, CLion narrowly integrates with CMake, which is also a big plus compared to Visual Studio. Therefore, in my opinion, it is worth to consider switching to MinGW now.

blocks|key|246958|text|我的浅见是，这取决于一个人最初是如何开始编码的。我已经使用g%2B%2B和gcc+20多年了，但我一直使用gcc的原因主要是出于许可的原因。虽然我也喜欢因为我来自DOS时代，没有一堆运行时依赖项或dll与我的东西捆绑在一起，但我仍然喜欢我的东西小而快。windows版的gcc提供了标准的win32库和公共控件，但我不得不为那些可能需要mcf垃圾才能正常工作或看起来更好的东西开发自己的win32控件。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|246959|虽然gcc可能在互联网上有强大的支持，但当涉及到win32的东西时，许多人又依赖于mcf和vc专有的东西，所以人们可能不得不解决自己的问题，并在遇到困难时发挥创造性。|246960|我认为这一切都是关于需求和环境的。如果你只是一个业余程序员，有时间研究，创建自己的库和东西，但你想要一个稳定的编译器，自80年代末以来，免费的，gcc听起来很适合这项工作。|246961|但在行业中，如果你想保持竞争力并留在竞争中，visual+studio是必须的。许多硬件制造商更喜欢捆绑与visual+studio兼容的库，因为它们是硬件而不是一些开源的gnu。|246962|这就是我的两个观点。|246963|entityMap^0|0|0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|L|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|M|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|N|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|6|7|O|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|H|3|I|5|6|7|P|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|J|3|-4|5|6|7|Q|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|K|$]]

I my humble opinion, it's depends how someone started to code in the first place. I've been using g++ and gcc for more than 20 years now but the reason why i keep using gcc is mainly for licensing reasons. Although i like it too when i don't have a bunch of runtime dependencies or dll's to bundle with my stuff since i came from the DOS era, i still like my stuff small and fast. gcc for windows comes with standard win32 libraries and common control but i had to develop my own win32 controls for stuff that might require mcf shit to work properly or just to look nicer.
Although gcc might have strong support over internet, when it comes to win32 stuff, many rely on mcf and vc proprietary stuff so again, one may have to work his own issues around and be creative when difficulty arises.
I think it's all about needs and circumstances. If you are just a hobbyist coders and have the time for researches, creating you own libs and stuff but you want a solid compiler that's around since the late 80's and free, gcc sound perfect for the job.
But in the industry visual studio is a must if you want to be competitive and stay in the race. Many hardware manufacturers would prefer bundling visual studio compatible libraries for they hardware over some opensource gnu stuff.
That's my two cents.

blocks|key|3141590|text|老实说，C%2B%2B应该用MS+Visual+Studio来处理。如果你想做跨平台的或者Unix的应用，那就用GCC吧。GCC可以工作，可以与Visual+Studio以外的任何IDE一起使用。即使是Visual+Studio代码也可以使用GCC。代码：：块，面向C/C%2B%2B开发人员的Eclipse+IDE，CLion，Notepad%2B%2B，甚至是我们一直熟知的好工具，Notepad都可以和GCC一起工作。最后，在磁盘空间较小的PC上，安装Visual+Studio的“使用C%2B%2B进行桌面开发”大约需要5+GB，如果它有用的话。这就是GCC对微软风险投资公司的猛烈抨击。它有原生的C语言支持。MSVC可以编译C，但需要进行大量的微调。最终能够编译需要花费大量的时间和精力。最终结论是：|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|3141591|如果MSVC能工作，它就能工作！如果MSVC不能工作，它就不能工作。|3141592|如果GCC安装了，它就能工作，如果它不能工作，那就是IDE的问题。|3141593|GCC是为那些不介意花4个小时在电脑前让它正常工作的人准备的。MSVC是为那些不关心C的人准备的，他们希望在不打探任何东西的情况下安装它。|3141594|entityMap^0|0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|J|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|K|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|L|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|6|7|M|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|H|3|-4|5|6|7|N|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|I|$]]

To be honest, C++ should be handled with MS Visual Studio. If you want to make cross-platform or Unix apps, use GCC. GCC works and can be used with any IDE other than Visual Studio. Even Visual Studio Code can use GCC. Code::Blocks, Eclipse IDE for C/C++ developers, CLion, Notepad++ and even the good ol' tool we've always known, Notepad works with GCC. And finally, on a PC with low disk space, installing Visual Studio's &quot;Desktop Development with C++&quot; is something like 5 GB, if it was to be useful. And this is where GCC hits MSVC hard. It has native C support. MSVC can compile C, but only with a lot of fine-tuning. It takes a lot of time and effort to finally be able to compile. The final verdict:
If MSVC works, it hella works! If MSVC doesn't work, it HELLA DON'T WORK.
If GCC installs, it works, and if it doesn't work, it's the IDE's problem.
GCC is for people who don't mind spending 4 hours at the computer making it work properly. MSVC is for those who don't care about C and want it to install without any pokin' around.

I currently develop in C++ on Windows, using Visual Studio 2010. After the official announcement of C++11, I have begun to use some of its features that are already available in MSVC. But, as expected, the great majority of the new changes are not supported.

I thought maybe the upcoming version of Visual Studio would add these new features. However, after reading <a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/b/vcblog/archive/2011/09/12/10209291.aspx" rel="noreferrer">this</a> it looks like very little is going to change.

And so, I'm curious about the feasibility of using GCC on Windows rather than MSVC, as it appears to support the great majority of C++11 already. As far as I can tell, this would mean using MinGW (I haven't seen any other native Windows versions of GCC). But I have questions about whether this would be worth trying:

<ul>
<li>Can it be used as a drop-in replacement for cl.exe, or would it involve a lot of hacks and compatibility issues to get Visual Studio to use a different compiler?</li>
<li>The main selling point for Visual Studio, in my opinion, is it's debugger. Is that still usable if you use a different compiler?</li>
<li>Since GCC comes from the *nix world, and isn't native to Windows, are there code quality issues with creating native Windows applications, versus using the native MSVC compiler? (If it matters: most of my projects are games.)</li>
<li>In other words, will the quality of my compiled exe's suffer from using a non-Windows-native compiler?</li>
</ul>

GCC worth using on Windows to replace MSVC?

集成开发环境

Visual Studio

编译器

调试器

Windows

Eclipse

Unix

我目前使用Visual Studio2010在Windows上的C++中进行开发。在C++11正式发布之后，我已经开始使用它的一些已经在MSVC中可用的特性。但是，正如预期的那样，绝大多数新的更改都不受支持。我想也许即将到来的Visual Studio版本会添加这些新功能。然而，在阅读了之后，看起来几乎没有什么变化。因...

问GCC在Windows上值得用来取代MSVC吗？
EN

社区

活动

资源

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问GCC在Windows上值得用来取代MSVC吗？EN

社区

活动

资源

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问GCC在Windows上值得用来取代MSVC吗？
EN