Sign in to follow this  
jcboliveira

What C++ Compilers can be used for creating Gauges?

Recommended Posts

Hi all,I Read in the Panel SDK tool kit, that one should use the Microsoft Visual C++ Compiler version 4.0 or higher.My questions is:Are any of you folks using other c++ compilers to develope FS2002 gauges? And if so, what are you guys/gals using?Thanks for any feedback.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

the Free BorlandC++ compiler does wonders for me! as the most compliant ++ implementation, extremely fast to compile, very optimized code, stable and bug free:http://www.borland.com/products/downloads/index.htmland select in the menu: C++ builder. Then in the table, choose the v5.5 download (~8.7 MB).and for a C, C++ file editor and IDA, you can also use this:http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32/Hope this helps!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JeanLuc....Thank you very much for your quick reponse. I assume the Borland package mentioned will work on ME ops. I shall download and installthe two items you provided in your answer.For years I had Borland C and C++ packages on old windoze machines,but those packages would not work correctly on my newer ME machine.I look forward to getting a C compiler for my ME machine.Thank you once more for your help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Additionaly the free mingw32 GNU C Compiler (GCC) also works. Get the last of the sd2gauxx.zip files from flightsim.com, it contains a lot of documentation and readymade gauges.h and makefiles compatible to VC,GCC,BCC.Arne Bartels

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arne,Thank you for your quick reponse. Question. Can you provide ahyperlink to where I can download the "mingw32 GNU C compiler"?I am currently in the process of downloading the compiler suggested by JeanLuc. And also figure on following up on downloading the second suggested package he mentioned. WOW from not having any C compilers on my ME windoze machine to having three! Feast or famine!Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BorlandC is a command line compiler. So it is a windows console program (runs in a "dos window" visually). It runs on every Windows OS then. The advantage of BorlandC in my opinion is that it compiles very fast. As an example, the full Meridian gauges compiles in about 6 sec on a P4 1.3 with max optimisations and no pre compiled headers... :-) This includes compile + link (pre compiled ressources of course in this case). This allow to quickly change a couple lines during dev (to test something), compile, load the aircraft, check etc... From analyzing the output, I can tell you it is highly optimized even for v5.5 geared at PII CPUs. You can help the optimizations yourself in arraging your C code and sometimes doing "low level" C code to get the most benefit of modern CPU pipeline architecture without a compiler which handles this directly. Note that v5.5 knows about U anv V pipes. This includes avoinding CPU stalls and and forcing the CPU to pre fetch the data cache when heavy memory code has to run (without using special opcodes in __asm statements).I've experienced the GNU C compiler back on UNIX systems and Amiga. It is quite good too and does a very good job at optimisations. I remember an old comparision (well 3 years old) where the GNU and BCC were above VC for optimization. I would guess though that VC7 is the most advanced of all 3 now but it is not free.Hope this helps!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doug,Thank you for the compiler reference. After downloading the Borland and LCC compilers mentioned by JeanLuc I think I will stick with them for the time being. I must put on my thinking cap....been a few years since I had done any C programming. But thanks for the help.JeanLuc,UNIX ha. Love it. Linux. Love it. Windoze.......well at least it has provided endless hours of flying planes ever since the original Jet Fighter II game by Velocity came along back when all we had where25 mhz 386 machines and then Aces of the South Pacific! Still miss that one. Thanks for your further information regarding the Borland compiler.I downloaded it and the one from Virginia Tech you mentioned. Now all I have to do is try to think a bit! Been a while. I used to have the Borland Turbo and Borland C++ versions 3.0 (yea, tis beenyears), installed on old windoze machines I scrapped after they went caput. So I know where you are coming from. I sold more then one person on using the Borland compilers verse the earlier MS compilers, due to the very type things you have indicated.While I got your attention people..............Can someone answer this question for me. Could one make a standalone xml gauge that would produce a sonic boom?That is...........does xml gauge (the language) have the capabilities to to do what I believe is called a "CALLBACK" that would then load the appropritate wav file.......once the aircraft exceeded MACH 1?As you can see by my question, this is all quite new to me. I obviously must wade through the available documentation which of course would include what Arne Bartels had produced.take care,George

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know that there is no sonic boom to be heard indside an aircraft? It's an effect that only appears outside the aircraft. Inside you notice probably a certain rise of the vibration level on passing Mach 1, but no boom.Arne Bartels

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>You know that there is no sonic boom to be heard indside an>aircraft? It's an effect that only appears outside the>aircraft. .>Arne Bartels True. But it would be nice to hear the boom when a supersonic AC flew by. The sound should be delayed. If one knows the distance and direction of travel then he could calculate the Mach Cone angle and figure when it hits a specific point.RAF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Generaly speaking yes. The best tool in my opinion for this is this one:http://home.t-online.de/home/Ollydbg/Very user friendly and a lot of powerfull functions.Now, specificaly for FS2004, since their new protection system you can no longer run a debugger alongside FS2004. You have to find a way to run FS2004 without its CD...Hope this helps!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,kinda off-topic question I have here. Say I have the code of the gauge ready, how dou I create the .gau file then? I mean, the BCC compiler outputs only an .exe file from the .cpp file. How do I get the .gau file? This question is actually the one that kept me from starting to make gauges for flightsim.Thanks,Steven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arne,Understand. I was afraid someone would bring that up. But as Ron indicated, it could be interesting to hear a boom from a aircraft passing by which has just exceeded MACH 1 and perhaps if theplane was really close as it passes by (head on for instance just infront of one) .....have a boom and perhaps joggle the flyers aircraft about a bit. And as Ron indicated, instead of a boom in the cockpit,have the aircraft you are flying vibrate a bit. Of course as I understand it, not sure which ones do and which ones don't....new generation fighters probably give no indication that one had exceededMACH 1. One reason why I thought it would be nice to at least attempt makinga sonic boom is that the one implemented in a few new fighter releases, I believe one is the F35 model I downloaded here, is thatit was not programmed correctly to provide the sound when the mach meter shows 1 or transists through 1.............it always seemed to go boom at a given air speed, around 650knots or so, regardless of altitude, barametric pressure etc.. So I thought it would be a challenge to try to make a bang based on more realistic conditions.Ron,Not sure how to answer your question about the Borland 5.5 compileras far as debugging features go.After downloading it and installing it, and then setting up some configure files such as to point to where libs/include directories are...........................all I had time to do is create a quick "hello world" source code file then compile it. I have not had time to start digging into how to use the compiler.But there are debugger options one can use within the command line.These are standard features found in most c/c++ compilers. Perhaps JeanLuc can better describe just what can be done with the degug features particular to the Borland 5.5 compiler goes.Just so you are aware, when I tried to download the Borland compilerat site mentioned by JeanLuc, I had to provide a lot of personal info. So if you would rather not give phone number, address etc., don't bother trying to download it.Lastly, if you are looking for a free C/C++ Compiler ....perhaps the second site JeanLuc references in this thread would be a better choice, it has a IDE interface (integrated development environment) and of course a fully functional menu driven window system, so it, once one learns how to use the windows front end, provides a way for new programmers to C/C++ an enhanced way to start programming. You can for instance create different user projects resource files that can be "fined tuned" to your needs for a given type program. And the documentation looks pretty good. The site mentioned provides you with a number of things to download, including user manuals, MSWindowAPI (application interface) help files. Each module can be downloaded and installed seperatly. In short I would recommend thispackage for any starting C programmer. The Borland package though it probably is superior in compile time/link time etc., is a command line only compiler. Some people just work better in a window driven type environment, as apposed to typing long lines of command options etc..In either case, I think either of these compilers would serve your needs should you be ready to take the plunge into C programmingbest regards all,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can compile (without linking usually "bcc -c ...") and link to a dll (gau) in a second step manually. But it is much better to use the makefile method ("make..") for this purpose. You find examples in the tutorial I mentioned before.Arne Bartels

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this