(March 4, 2020 at 5:27 pm)Abaddon_ire Wrote:(March 4, 2020 at 9:18 am)FlatAssembler Wrote: If you're worried about my program containing malware, you can study the source code and compile it yourself. However, I think it's significantly to just run the executable, because I haven't managed to compile it with MinGW (which is probably the most popular C++ compiler on Windows), and I've only managed to compile it with TDM-GCC with some special settings.
No critique of your source, but most have not the resources to compile anything. That vast bulk of computer users have not a clue what that might be. They have no reason to do so. And why should they? They have no interest in it. That does not in any way mean that they are stupid. It just is not "their thing". Much as I could go and graduate as a doctor, so why do I not? Because it is not my thing, I have no interest in doing so. Were I to graduate as a medical doctor, I guarantee you two things. I could do it. And I would be the most obnoxious doctor ever. Because I would hate it as a career. I would actively hate what I was doing every day.
Seems to me that this would be exactly the wrong attitude to enter the doctoring profession with.
Far better to go into a metier that one actually enjoys in and of itself.
Well, yeah, not everybody has the resources to compile something which can only be compiled using Intel C Compiler or Visual Studio Professional, or with some free compiler but with complicated and unknown options. If something can be easily compiled with TDMGCC, that argument really doesn't apply, since TDMGCC is free to download and incredibly easy to install. Besides, I even provided the executable, so I don't see the excuse not to attempt to run it if you are going to try to participate in the discussion.
I can make it even easier, though. On 32-bit Windows, the program behaves as it does on CPPSH. On 64-bit Linux, on that same computer, it behaves as it does on onlineGDB.
