Possibility to support another compiler (Pelles C)

[skirby]

Hello,

Do you think it would be possible for Code::Blocks to support another compiler: Pelles C
You can find it here: http://smorgasbordet.com/pellesc/

It only supports C file (not C++) but it is very very good.
I encourage you to visit its web site in order to see the capabilities of that compiler.
It create fast and small executable.
It can compile ASM file.

Some people will say: "yes, it is cool but it already have a IDE. Why do you want to add it into Code::Blocks?"
They are right but the Pelles C IDE is not very powerful and some nasty bug still persits since months.
The author prefer improve the compiler rather than the IDE (and I think he is right)

I hope Code::Blocks authors could do something because this compiler worth it.


Happy new year and have a nice day.

[stahta01]

I am willing to try making C::B work with "Pelles C", but if it takes more than 2 or 3 days will have to give up because of the other tasks I am working on.

Is it open source? Found the FAQ, it is closed source.

Tim S

[killerbot]

what would be of good help to us so we don't need to go through the manual :
- have a look at the compiler options (and advanced options) for GCC and provide us with a list for the options, then we can put them in code. This is probably easier for you since you know that compiler.

You can even go all the way, have a look at the compiler code in the compiler plug-in of CB (get sources from svn repos)

[skirby]

Thanks for your answer.

Firstly, I am going to ask for the Pelles C author if it is agree.
If yes, I will make a list with all compiler options.

[David Perfors]

I wonder why you need any permision of the author. When it is free, we can support it...

[killerbot]

just do it ;-) we can always convince the author later on the recommend CB :-) :-)

[severach]

This should be an easy compiler to add. The command structure is almost the same as any Microsoft compiler. I don't see any way to add debugging support.

[killerbot]

debugging wil be much harder I guess, first focus on the compiler support

[skirby]

OK, this author is agree.
We can integrate Pelles C compiler into Code:Blocks 

I am creating a list of all compiler command line options.
It should be ready in one or two days.

[tiwag]

...We can integrate Pelles C compiler into Code:Blocks  ...

why should one do that ?

Pelles C comes with its own nice IDE, well designed and powerful built in debugger ...

[RJP Computing]

why should one do that ?

Pelles C comes with its own nice IDE, well designed and powerful built in debugger ...

True, PellesC does come with an IDE, but I think it would be nice (not mandatory) to have one common development environment.

Plus if the idea was never to add support for compilers with good IDE's then Visual C++ 8.0 wouldn't be supported.

[Phatency]

Plus if the idea was never to add support for compilers with good IDE's then Visual C++ 8.0 wouldn't be supported.

Good IDE!? What are you on?

[lubos]

Plus if the idea was never to add support for compilers with good IDE's then Visual C++ 8.0 wouldn't be supported.

Good IDE!? What are you on?

some people love it, some hate it, as always.

[RJP Computing]

Good IDE!? What are you on?

Come on. You and I both know that good is subjective and yes everybody that is here on the Code::Blocks forum is here because they like Code::Blocks. I didn't say that it is the best and everything else stinks, I was just meaning that it had a full IDE already that had a code editor, debugger and visual designer just like PellesC.

[killerbot]

calm calm.
If we can support another compiler (so not debugging), then that's a good thing. Several of the compilers we support have their own IDE (eg . M$ , Borland, Watcom, Intel ,..), but if you can stay within the same IDE when working on different projects, it's nice. Plus also for CB it's nice to have a wide support. But let's take step for step, since it is difficult to know all compiler settings, and the logic has to be simple (eg : mutual exclusive settings, we don't do that), so you tick a whole bunch of options where the compiler might tell you in then end the mix is not correct. But we offer the settings, the user with sound knowledge ticks what he wants.
So once we have a substantial set of settins for a compiler we can start and later on adjust or expand.