Because MSVC can't compile
Irrelevant, because
that isn't legal Standard C or C++. It is an illegal lexical pattern that a conformant compiler will disallow. If you want to define a function within another function you can use the Functor design pattern, but it's bad practice anyway to do so inside a function; if you did it in a professional environment with capable developers you would be asked what the hell you were thinking.
You are, once again, wrong.
Or maybe because you can invoke GCC with
gcc *.c
and furthermore put it in a batch file, for double-click compiling?
Hot damn, it's like I don't have nmake or cl or link sitting in %PROGRAM_FILES%\%VS9%\VC\bin!
For the denser sort, here's a translation:
you can do exactly that with MSVC, too.
You are, once again, wrong. But you're doubly so, because not only can you do it, it's idiotic to trumpet that as being a net benefit on the Windows platform.
Because you don't have to navigate a sub-menu of an options window of a properties page to add a new library file?
No, I don't. That you don't know how to effectively use a set of tools is not my problem.
Because you must register with microsoft for prolonged use of the free version?
Yeah, free registrations are so onerous and terrible and oh wait it takes quite literally 30 seconds.
Because all examples for it will work unaltered or with freely available libraries, while MSVC examples routinely use mfc and atl, both unavailable in the express editions since 2005 or so(Didn't check the MSV* varsion, but they dropped support before visual studio 2008)?
Nonsense. Examples related to MFC or ATL use MFC or ATL. Others do not.
You are, once again, wrong.
The fact that you conveniently focused the problem as "GCC is inferior to MSVC", win in reality it is "MSVC, GCC, and practically any other compiler produce incompatible compiled C++" *really* shows how mature and knowledgable you are, since you don't have to resort to only telling half-truths by conveniently only mentioning one small facet of an issue that is somewhat less than well known, in hopes that others don't understand...
This is top-to-bottom, manifestly wrong. Can you read? No, seriously. Can you read? Are you capable of actually understanding what is written?
GCC is inferior
on Windows. It is a platform
designed for using MSVC. Other systems
are going to be inferior to the integrated solution. You, my intellectually dishonest and deficient punching bag, are mischaracterizing what I say either because you cannot process it, or because you are unwilling to admit that you might actually be--and I know this is a shocker--arguing an untenable position.
"Oh hurr my minor and entirely irrelevant points show how knowledgable [sic] you really are!" Please. If you can't present a coherent case, don't try to respond at all.
You are...once again...wrong.
Warning: Continued use of MSVC relies on microsoft not to cancel or further limit the express editions,
Fearmongering. Stupid fearmongering, too; it's far more likely that DevDiv's full development suite (which only makes about a billion dollars in revenue per year) will be turned into freely available software.
or requires you to pay them despite the face that they may release the full tool for free at any time.
And you benefitted in the meantime. Not relevant. (That, and VS2008 is already free for damned near any individuals who'd want it. If you can't find a
free, legal version of VS2008 Professional you aren't looking very hard.)
Oh, and surely you might have had problems getting MSVC to compile some of the many GCC C extensions or GCC C++ extensions
...Yes.
Because they are nonstandard extensions. Irrelevant.
Especially since MSVC doesn't seem to have an easily googled list, so it can be assumed that it doesn't have anything optional or extra. (-pedantic can be used to warn you if GCC finds any of these non-standard extensions...)
This just in: a standard compiler doesn't add things that aren't part of the standard. Irrelevant.
Shocker.
Look. Your high school classes have clearly not prepared you for sane, cogent discussion about technical topics, and you aren't exactly doing a good job of showing any meaningful domain-specific knowledge of your own; what you keep bringing up is freshly Googled fearmongering garbage that you aren't capable of interpreting. You don't know enough to know that it has no reasonable bearing on the point you want to drive. Why don't you just admit that you don't have a case and sit down, shut up, and learn from people who
do know what they're talking about?
I mean, for the love of God. You're a high-schooler who's still in the "OH GOD FREE SOFTWARE IS BETTER THAN SEX" phase. There's a possibility that, someday, you might have the experience and knowledge to be able to analyze a situation
without the hysteria and foolish partisanship you insist on employing now. You can't now. Stop.