okay so I'm on OS and I use terminal to compile my c code. Whenever I make a file using nano or vim called "tst.c" (or whatever the name might be ) then I compile using (my teacher told me to use this everytime so I don't think this is the problem:
gcc -Wall -std=c99 -o tst.c ./tst.c
then it turns into binary I'm guessing. But when I try to edit it again, it has all these weird encryptions I'm guessing like:
��������H���__PAGEZERO��������������������������������������������������������ÿ��__TEXT����������������������������������������������������__text����������__TEXT����������`�����*�������`���������������Ä������������__stubs���������__TEXT����������ä������������ä��������������Ä�����������__stub_helper���__TEXT����������ê������������ê���������������Ä������������__cstring�������
So, question is, how do I revert so I can edit and not make a new file every time???????
You're overwriting your original source file with the compiled executable because of the -o option:
gcc -Wall -std=c99 -o tst.c ./tst.c
^^^^^^^^
You'll need to specify a different output file name in the -o option:
gcc -Wall -std=c99 -o tst tst.c
Otherwise, you can leave the -o option off entirely, and the compiled executable will be written to a file named a.out.
Eventually, you'll want to automate all of this with the make utility, but for now just be aware of how the -o option works.
the -o (name) flag means you are storing the output into whatever you used for name.. so if you add .c to the end of the name you'll see lots of interesting stuff. Man pages are pretty awesome when learning about what each flags do.
Related
I have reinstalled mingw in my system and downloaded the gcc compiler.
I was shocked after compiling the first file which was "subject.c" but the name of the compiled file which gcc returned was "a.exe". It should be "subject.exe" but do not know why this happened.
Can anyone please explain the reason behind this ?
expected:
gcc subject.c
ls
subject.c subject.exe
tried:
gcc subject.c
ls
subject.c a.exe
-o can be used to give the name of the output file.
For example,
gcc -Wall -Wextra -pedantic subject.c -o subject.exe
(Do enable your compiler's warnings!)
gcc names its output files, in the absence of other instructions, a.out or a.exe depending on system environment because that is what it's supposed to do.
To override this default behavior, you can use the -o flag which tells gcc that the next argument is the desired name for the output file. For instance:
gcc -o subject.exe subject.c
There is no automatic functionality built into gcc to strip a source file of its file extension and add .exe to the end but this can be done manually with Makefiles or other similar scripts, for instance you can write a Makefile with the following contents:
%.exe: %.c
gcc -o $# $<
Then a command like make subject.exe would be translated to gcc -o subject.exe subject.c, which may be what you're looking for.
There is functionality built into gcc to strip source files of their extensions during different parts of the compilation process, which may have been what confused you. For instance a call like gcc -c subject.c can be expected to produce an object file called subject.o, likewise gcc -S subject.c can be expected to produce an assembly language file called subject.s, however this does not apply to executable files not only for historical reasons, but because programs can be compiled from multiple source files and there is not always a clear way to choose a name for the executable output.
Sorry. I think this question would be very easy to you guys.
I have two c files and one h file, I put those two .c files stack.c and main.c and one .h file stack.h inside a folder named "test" at Desktop.
So they are in C:\Users\user\Desktop\test
However when i try to test this code by writing
gcc -c stack.c sq_main.c -l stack.h
It continuously shows "unkown type name ..."
I think the header file is not included into those two .c files.
Actually I wrote the code
#include "stack.h"
Inside stack.c and main.c
Can anyone tell me how to include header file properly?
You are using GCC wrongly. I guess you are on Linux (or on something emulating it like MinGW ...)
If you insist on giving several commands in a terminal, you'll need to run
gcc -Wall -Wextra -g -c stack.c
gcc -Wall -Wextra -g -c sq_main.c
these two commands are building object files stack.o & sq_main.o (from stack.c & the #include-d stack.h, and sq_main.c & the #include-d stack.h, respectively). The options -Wall -Wextra are asking for all warnings and some extra warnings. The -g option asks for debugging information. The -c option asks for compiling only. Assuming that they are enough for your program, you need to link these object files to make an executable:
gcc -g stack.o sq_main.o -o myprogram
You might need to add -Iinclude-directory options to the compiling commands (the first two), and you might need to add -Llibrary-directory and -llibrary-name to the linking command. Order of arguments to gcc matters a lot. You could also add -H to ask the compiler to show which files are included. And GCC has a lot of other options. Read the Invoking GCC chapter of its documentation.
The .o suffix might be .obj on most Windows systems. You might also need myprogram.exe instead of myprogram. I never used Windows so I cannot help more.
In practice, you should use GNU make and write some Makefile; this answer might inspire you.
I have to turn off optimizations while compiling c code I wrote while using the gcc compiler on a linux. I have found that I can compile the code but I can only get the code to compile without the executable name specified (default to a.out).
So this works:
gcc -O0 Problem04b.c
But my problem is that I have to submit this assignment and I can't submit an executable called a.out because my instructor needs to know which problem it is. I realize I can probably just run
cp a.out Problem04b
then
rm a.out
but I want to know if there is a way I can just compile the code directly into the executable Problem04b. I've tried to run the command like this:
gcc -O0 Problem04b Problem04b.c
but I'm having no luck.
Thanks for your help.
It's the -o flag:
gcc -O0 -o Problem04b Problem04b.c
To specify the output file, you need to use the -o <filename> option with gcc.
Note : Please mind the lower case here
In your case, it should be
gcc -O0 -o Problem04b Problem04b.c
For reference: From gcc manual
-o file
Place output in file file. This applies to whatever sort of output is being produced, whether it be an executable file, an object file, an assembler file or preprocessed C code.
Actually, you also want to get warnings (that won't change the produced executable, but it is very helpful to you), so compile with
gcc -O0 -Wall -Wextra Problem04b.c -o Problem04b
The -Wall option asks for nearly all warnings, the -Wextra option asks for even more of them.
To run your thing (the ./ is useful because of possible PATH issues):
./Problem04b
Notice that -O0 is optional (since it is the default), you could remove it.
gcc -Wall -Wextra Problem04b.c -o Problem04b
If you want real optimization, e.g. for benchmarking, use e.g. -O1 or -O2 or -O3
You probably want to compile with debug information, then
gcc -g -Wall -Wextra Problem04b.c -o Problem04b
and of course you need to learn how to use the GDB debugger. So read some tutorial about that, then type
gdb ./Problem04b
You'll get a (gdb) prompt. Try help at that time.
You probably want to read the chapter about invoking GCC of the GCC documentation.
My C compiler was working a second ago and making executables, but I started working on a new .c file and suddenly it won't work anymore. I haven't changed anything and I'm still using the same commands, Gitbash version, etc. The compiler is still able to catch errors, so gcc works, but after calling:
gcc -std=c99 my_file.c
there is no executable called my_file.exe. Help sites online suggest installing additional software to fix the error, but I'm hesitant to do so because everything was working fine earlier and I don't want to aggravate the problem with additional software.
Since you have not specified the name of the file to output, GCC will output a.exe.
If you desire output named something else, you must use the -o flag, for example:
gcc -std=c99 -o my_file.exe my_file.c
On Unix, that compiler command would generate an executable a.out. You may find that there is an executable with a default name — but I don't have Windows to check what that name is. Guesses might include a.exe, a_out.exe, aout.exe, etc.
To get my_file.exe:
gcc -std=c99 -o my_file.exe my_file.c
If you don't specify an output -o flag you will get a.exe by default (a.out on other platforms),
gcc -std=c99 my_file.c
If it is working, produces
a.exe
I think you wanted
gcc -std=c99 -o my_file.exe my_file.c
We are required to compile C source codes using gcc in this manner:
gcc -ansi -pedantic -Wall program.c
I'm wondering how can I 'automate' this so when I enter:
gcc program.c
It will automatically compile with the 3 switches. Is this possible?
You can also use the implicit rules of make, so that you don't have to write a makefile for every program. Make will automatically call the compiler if you say make foo and there exists a foo.c file in the current directory. To add flags to this define the variable CFLAGS in your environment, e.g. in bash add export CFLAGS="-Wall -pedantic -ansi" to .bashrc.
If your program depends on multiple files however you'll have to create a makefile, but for C compilation you can get away with just listing dependancies so long as one of them has the same base name as a target.
For example for this makefile:
# Makefile
foo:foo.o bar.o
running make will execute the commands
gcc $CFLAGS -c -o foo.o foo.c
gcc $CFLAGS -c -o bar.o bar.c
gcc -o foo foo.o bar.o
without you having to add any rules.
To automate the build of any number of build steps / complex parameters, you should use a makefile.
Once you have a makefile you simply need to type: make
alias gcc="gcc -ansi -pedantic -Wall"
But as #Brian said, you really should use a makefile, or better, a build system like CMake or SCons.
A makefile would be the traditional way, especially as part of a larger build process.
If you frequently want to build without a makefile, you could define an alias in your .bashrc or equivalent: alias gcc=gcc -ansi -pedantic -Wall.
You can use a shell script that takes some cues by how its called and invokes make after setting CFLAGS appropriately for the occasional one-off build.
Lets say you have /usr/bin/compile , which is a shell script that looks at $0 to see what name actually invoked it. You then make symbolic links to it named pedantic, fullwarn, etc.
In the shell script itself, something like:
OLDCFLAGS=$CFLAGS
WHATAMI=$(basename $0)
case "$WHATAMI" in
pedantic)
export CFLAGS="-Wall -pedantic -ansi"
make $#
exit $?
;;
c99)
export CFLAGS="-std=c99 ... ... ..."
....
Then, to compile foo.c with the extra naggy flags:
pedantic foo
This is handy, as I said for one-off builds, e.g trying to compile code that someone posted in a question, or working out how to use a new library, etc.
For anything else, just use a makefile, as others have said.