I need help compiling SFML2 with CMake.
Here's the log:
[code]Check for working C compiler using: Visual Studio 10
Check for working C compiler using: Visual Studio 10 -- broken
CMake Error at C:/Program Files (x86)/CMake 2.8/share/cmake-2.8/Modules/CMakeTestCCompiler.cmake:52 (MESSAGE):
The C compiler "C:/Program Files (x86)/Microsoft Visual Studio
10.0/VC/bin/cl.exe" is not able to compile a simple test program.
It fails with the following output:
Change Dir: C:/Users/Iiro/Desktop/SFML2_cpp/CMakeFiles/CMakeTmp
Run Build Command:C:\PROGRA~2\MICROS~1.0\Common7\IDE\VCExpress.exe
CMAKE_TRY_COMPILE.sln /build Debug /project cmTryCompileExec
Microsoft (R) Visual C++ 2010 Express Version 10.0.30319.1.
Copyright (C) Microsoft Corp. All rights reserved.
1>------ Build started: Project: cmTryCompileExec, Configuration: Debug
Win32 ------
1>cl : Command line warning D9035: option 'GZ' has been deprecated and will
be removed in a future release
1>cl : Command line warning D9036: use 'RTC1' instead of 'GZ'
1> testCCompiler.c
1>C:\Users\Iiro\Desktop\SFML2_cpp\CMakeFiles\CMakeTmp\testCCompiler.c :
fatal error C1902: Program database manager mismatch; please check your
installation
========== Build: 0 succeeded, 1 failed, 0 up-to-date, 0 skipped
==========
CMake will not be able to correctly generate this project.
Call Stack (most recent call first):
CMakeLists.txt:11 (project)
Configuring incomplete, errors occurred![/code]
I've tried to reinstall CMake and Microsoft Visual C++ but that didn't help.
[QUOTE=Frugle;31527295]I need help compiling SFML2 with CMake.
Here's the log:
[code]Check for working C compiler using: Visual Studio 10
Check for working C compiler using: Visual Studio 10 -- broken
CMake Error at C:/Program Files (x86)/CMake 2.8/share/cmake-2.8/Modules/CMakeTestCCompiler.cmake:52 (MESSAGE):
The C compiler "C:/Program Files (x86)/Microsoft Visual Studio
10.0/VC/bin/cl.exe" is not able to compile a simple test program.
It fails with the following output:
Change Dir: C:/Users/Iiro/Desktop/SFML2_cpp/CMakeFiles/CMakeTmp
Run Build Command:C:\PROGRA~2\MICROS~1.0\Common7\IDE\VCExpress.exe
CMAKE_TRY_COMPILE.sln /build Debug /project cmTryCompileExec
Microsoft (R) Visual C++ 2010 Express Version 10.0.30319.1.
Copyright (C) Microsoft Corp. All rights reserved.
1>------ Build started: Project: cmTryCompileExec, Configuration: Debug
Win32 ------
1>cl : Command line warning D9035: option 'GZ' has been deprecated and will
be removed in a future release
1>cl : Command line warning D9036: use 'RTC1' instead of 'GZ'
1> testCCompiler.c
1>C:\Users\Iiro\Desktop\SFML2_cpp\CMakeFiles\CMakeTmp\testCCompiler.c :
fatal error C1902: Program database manager mismatch; please check your
installation
========== Build: 0 succeeded, 1 failed, 0 up-to-date, 0 skipped
==========
CMake will not be able to correctly generate this project.
Call Stack (most recent call first):
CMakeLists.txt:11 (project)
Configuring incomplete, errors occurred![/code]
I've tried to reinstall CMake and Microsoft Visual C++ but that didn't help.[/QUOTE]
try going into the visual studio folder under start, then into tools and there should be a VS CMD.
use that to navigate to the cmake folder and open CMake-gui
Should work with that
Anyone have a good private SVN hoster thats like free
[QUOTE=Richy19;31527364]try going into the visual studio folder under start, then into tools and there should be a VS CMD.
use that to navigate to the cmake folder and open CMake-gui
Should work with that[/QUOTE]
Nope, didn't work. Same error.
[QUOTE=Frugle;31527549]Nope, didn't work. Same error.[/QUOTE]
Only other thing i can think of is doing what i said, but open the VS-CMD as admin
[editline]4th August 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Flash;31527508]Anyone have a good private SVN hoster thats like free[/QUOTE]
BitBucket is the only free private hoster that I can recommend but it uses Mercurial (HG)
I think assembla might have something tho
I believe beanstalk offers a free trial account, it's only 1 user, 1 repo and 100 MB of space though so probably not your best choice.
I still appear to be experiencing the problem of actually finding implementation.
I am consistently studying various C++ related material, but rarely actually code anything, while not being certain exactly why. It could partially be the barrier of having to digest an enormous amount of information before being capable of doing anything useful with it. It could also be the fact that I am simply not writing ideas down. Or it may be the fact that I am not necessarily a mathematical person, and as a result do not extensively enjoy more trivial exercises, which in turn stops me from further advancement.
I was wondering whether anyone here is experiencing or has experienced any similar problems? I always viewed programming as the art of creating ideas from logical constructs rather then something necessarily requiring a mathematical passion.
I'm new to programming, and I've encountered a problem
[code]
//Field.hpp
#pragma once
enum Sides {LEFT=1, RIGHT=2, UP=4, DOWN=8};
class cSquare
{
public:
int SetSide(Sides side, bool State);
int SetDisabled(bool State);
unsigned short int GetSide() const;
private:
unsigned short int flags;
};
class cField
{
public:
cField(int sLength);
~cField();
void validate(int x, int y);
private:
cSquare* Field = NULL;
};
[/code]
When I try to compile that bit, it tells me that there is a "Declaration Syntax Error" in those lines:
[code]class cSquare[/code]
and
[code]class cField [/code]
What the hell?
Mind posting the full error and the file you include before it?
[QUOTE=Jookia;31536953]Mind posting the full error and the file you include before it?[/QUOTE]
I include nothing in this file, and the error is:
[code][BCC32 Error] Field.hpp(9): E2141 Declaration syntax error
[BCC32 Error] Field.hpp(19): E2141 Declaration syntax error[/code]
Don't use Borland.
[QUOTE=Jookia;31537261]Don't use Borland.[/QUOTE]
Alright.
But is the code alright? It seems yes.
I've got some experience with delphi, so I'm not completely new to programming. But I'm almost new.
Use Visual Studio C++ Express, or CodeBlocks and MinGW. But not Borland. You also didn't include the previous file included.
[QUOTE=Jookia;31537529]You also didn't include the previous file included.[/QUOTE]
Which file didn't I include? I did not #include anything.
Well, was there ANYTHING before the #include statement to include that file?
[QUOTE=genkaz92;31530154]I still appear to be experiencing the problem of actually finding implementation.
I am consistently studying various C++ related material, but rarely actually code anything, while not being certain exactly why. It could partially be the barrier of having to digest an enormous amount of information before being capable of doing anything useful with it. It could also be the fact that I am simply not writing ideas down. Or it may be the fact that I am not necessarily a mathematical person, and as a result do not extensively enjoy more trivial exercises, which in turn stops me from further advancement.
I was wondering whether anyone here is experiencing or has experienced any similar problems? I always viewed programming as the art of creating ideas from logical constructs rather then something necessarily requiring a mathematical passion.[/QUOTE]
Programming is a lot and a lot of maths/algorithms im afraid, its difficult to get around that. But the silly problems are boring as shit, do something interesting like... make a 2d topdown zombie shooter! :v:
[QUOTE=Jookia;31537529]Use Visual Studio C++ Express, or CodeBlocks and MinGW. But not Borland. You also didn't include the previous file included.[/QUOTE]
If you are a student, you can also get Visual Studio C++ Professional for free through microsoft's dreamspark.
[QUOTE=uitham;31545994]If you are a student, you can also get Visual Studio C++ Professional for free through microsoft's dreamspark.[/QUOTE]
Already got it, thanks
And yeah, problem solved, it was because borland's compiler is, seemingly, stupid. Rate me boxes.
[QUOTE=Mikolah;31546087]it was because borland's compiler is, seemingly, stupid. Rate me boxes.[/QUOTE]
considering its last real update was pre 2000 it's to be expected
[QUOTE=Jookia;31546386]considering its last real update was pre 2000 it's to be expected[/QUOTE]
Oh god... are you serious?
[QUOTE=Mikolah;31546652]Oh god... are you serious?[/QUOTE]
He is
[editline]5th August 2011[/editline]
In fact, Jookia is a generally very serious person as you might notice if you start to frequent the WAYWO
[QUOTE=Icedshot;31545961]Programming is a lot and a lot of maths/algorithms im afraid, its difficult to get around that. But the silly problems are boring as shit, do something interesting like... make a 2d topdown zombie shooter! :v:[/QUOTE] i definitely have nothing actually against math or algorithms, I was merely saying that i do not necessarily have math as a goal when it comes to programming, and I would like to again agree with the whole pointless program conundrum. It is that unfortuntely according to my knoweledge so far, there is only so much that can be done fun wise without any custom libraries, although that might change as i study various things such as STL.
[QUOTE=genkaz92;31546731]i definitely have nothing actually against math or algorithms, I was merely saying that i do not necessarily have math as a goal when it comes to programming, and I would like to again agree with the whole pointless program conundrum. It is that unfortuntely according to my knoweledge so far, there is only so much that can be done fun wise without any custom libraries, although that might change as i study various things such as STL.[/QUOTE]
What i did when i started off with c++ was begin a ridiculously overambitious project that i knew id never finish. I learnt a huge amount about programming trying to overcome all the problems (and it was quite fun), and then you can set your sights slightly lower and actually accomplish something
You could try getting SFML and have a play around with that, its a very good 2d library for making anything 2d orientated, and you can use it in OpenGL mode eventually to do 3d applications as well
[QUOTE=esalaka;31546700]He is
[editline]5th August 2011[/editline]
In fact, Jookia is a generally very serious person as you might notice if you start to frequent the WAYWO[/QUOTE]
i actually did mean that, i cant really find a date for the newest version, the oldest date i know of is 1999 or 1997.
[QUOTE=Jookia;31546888]i actually did mean that, i cant really find a date for the newest version, the oldest date i know of is 1999 or 1997.[/QUOTE]
I was just poking a little fun at your silly "SVN is masochism" speech, don't mind it.
The first part of that post was completely devoid of irony.
Quick question with XNA, is it usually faster to check whether things are onscreen before drawing them, or just draw it all? There's probably 100 odd objects that'll be doing these checks so I'm not sure what's faster.
[QUOTE=chaz13;31548489]Quick question with XNA, is it usually faster to check whether things are onscreen before drawing them, or just draw it all? There's probably 100 odd objects that'll be doing these checks so I'm not sure what's faster.[/QUOTE]
Test it.
[editline]5th August 2011[/editline]
XNA might not even draw off-screen objects.
[QUOTE=esalaka;31548751]Test it.
[editline]5th August 2011[/editline]
XNA might not even draw off-screen objects.[/QUOTE]
I'm attempting to, I'm not too sure how to work out the time between frames but I'm working on it :smile: I have the feeling it probably doesn't, as it's not a straight drawing call and a spritebatch instead.
I'm working on my own 3d engine made with c++ and opengl, and by now I'm starting to work on things such as textures and terrain. Does anybody know of any proper books that explains the technical details of procedural generation, the math behind it etc?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
