What Are Some Free C and C Compilers

Compilers convert instructions written in a programming language to machine code that can be read by computers. If youre interested in learning to program in C or C, youll find this list of free compilers handy. Most of These ​Compilers ​Handle Both C and C Microsoft Windows SDK. This free SDK is for Windows 7 and .NET Framework 4. It provides compilers, tools libraries, code samples  and a help system for developers.Turbo C for Windows 7,8,8.1 and 10. The .NET Framework is required for Windows 7, Vista and XP, but there is no pre-requirement for more recent Windows versions.  GCC  is the classic open source C compiler for Linux and many other operating systems (including Windows under Cygwin or Ming). This project has been around forever and provides excellent open source quality software. It doesnt come with an IDE, but there are loads out there.Digital Mars C/C Compiler. The company offers several free compiler packages.  Xcode  is for Apples Mac OSX operating system and its version of GCC. It has excellent documentation and SDKs for Mac and iPhone. If you have a Mac, this is what you use.Portable C Compiler. This was developed from one of the earliest C Compilers. At the start of the 80s, most C compilers were based on it. Portability was designed into it from the start.Failsafe C. A Japanese project from the Research Team for Software Security at the Research Center for Information Security, National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology, Japan, this version of C for Linux supports over 500 functions (not C99 or Widechar). It provides complete protection against memory block over-boundary accesses making it as safe as Java and C#.Pelles C is a free development kit for Windows and Windows Mobile containing an optimizing C compiler, a macro assembler, a linker, a resource compiler, a message compiler, a make utility and installs builders for both Windows and Windows Mobile. It also has an IDE with project management, debugger, source code editor and resource editors for dialogs, menus, string tables, accelerator tables, bitmaps, icons, cursors, animated cursors, animation videos, versions, and XP manifests.Borland C 5.5  compiler is a blazingly fast 32-bit optimizing compiler. It i ncludes the latest ANSI/ISO C language support including the Standard Template Library framework and C template support and the complete Borland C/C Runtime Library. Also included in the free download are the Borland C/C command line tools such as the high-performance Borland linker and resource compiler.nesC is an extension to the C programming language designed to embody the structuring concepts and execution model of TinyOS. TinyOS is an event-driven operating system designed for sensor network nodes that have very limited resources (e.g., 8K bytes of program memory, 512 bytes of RAM).Orange C.  Orange C/C supports C standards through C11 and C 11. The IDE is full-featured and includes a colorizing editor. This compiler runs on WIN32 and DOS. It generates 32-bit programs for both.SubC is a fast, simple public domain compiler for a clean subset of the C programming language on Linux, FreeBSD and Windows platforms.   Now that you have a compiler, youre ready for  C and Cprogramming tutorials.

SPE 566 Defining Behavior - 753 Words

SPE 566: Defining Behavior Assignment Purpose The purpose of this assignment is to demonstrate understanding and application of basic concepts of behavior analysis. Specifically you are required to develop objective, behavioral definitions of social skills behavior avoiding subjective, mentalistic terms, and hypothetical constructs. General Information In a short answer format, you should choose any 3 of the 10 social skill behaviors for which you will provide several points of knowledge, as well as produce a well written behavioral objective. The ten social skill behaviors are: Greeting, Playing, Following Directions, Engaging in Eye Contact, Initiating a Conversation, Participating in a Conversation, Asking Questions, Sharing,†¦show more content†¦All assignments must be submitted through this link -- assignments may not be submitted via email. Grading Procedures The Defining Behavior assignment is worth 15 points total. Choose any 3 of the terms, with each term worth 5 points. Each social skills behavior will be graded according the criteria listed in the Scoring Grid below. Note: You must indicate the behavior that you are defining in order for your assignment to be reviewed and graded. Scoring Grid - Defining Behavior Assignment Please note: Do NOT include the Scoring Grid with your document. Choose any 3 of the following: Expected Content Points Earned Possible Points Greeting behavior How would you operationally define the behavior? How would you measure this behavior? Cite from your textbook. Produce a behavioral objective incuding conditions/context, critieria, target behavior and learner. 5 Playing behavior How would you operationally define the behavior? How would you measure this behavior? Cite from your textbook. Produce a behavioral objective incuding conditions/context, critieria, target behavior, and learner. 5 Following Directions How would you operationally define the behavior? How would you measure this behavior? Cite from your textbook. Produce a behavioral objective incuding conditions/context, critieria, target behavior, and learner. 5 Eye Contact How would you operationally define the behavior? How would you measure thisShow MoreRelatedMedicare Policy Analysis447966 Words   |  1792 Pagespublic re- 6 port providing industrywide aggregate or average in- 7 formation to be used in assessing the overall impact 8 of PBMs on prescription drug prices and spending. 9 Such report shall not disclose the identity of a spe- 10 cific PBM, or prices charged by such PBM, or a 11 specific retailer, manufacturer, or wholesaler, or any 12 other confidential or trade secret information. (4) PENALTIES.—The provisions of subsection 14 (b)(3)(C) of section

Literal Intelligence Collection Free Essays

Literal Intelligence Collection: National Intelligence and the NSA wireless intercept program Intelligence Collection: Sources and Challenges February 13, 2012 In the aftermath of 9/11 the intelligence community (IC) felt pressure from all directions. Employees of the IC, Congress, and the general public wanted questions answered as to why our nation didn’t know an attack was imminent. This â€Å"failure† of intelligence caused a shake up within the entire IC, leading to many future changes. We will write a custom essay sample on Literal Intelligence Collection or any similar topic only for you Order Now One such change was in communications intelligence (COMINT) collection. According to Cummings (2006), â€Å"President George W. Bush said that he authorized NSA to intercept the international communications of people with known links to al Qaeda and related terrorist organizations in the weeks following the September 11th terrorist attacks† (p. 6). The President’s decision had many repercussions. I will discuss the parameters of the decision, the management issues associated with it that lead to such controversy, and the impact it had on national intelligence and the NSA. What led to this drastic decision by the U. S. President? The United States was blind-sighted in the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack which resulted in the death of 2,977 innocent Americans. This was the largest attack in the history of the U. S. on our soil and although the signs were there for the intelligence community to see, it was mistakenly not put together. Much of the attack stemmed from communications between terrorist or those connected and working with terrorist within our Country, and this was unacceptable. In order to defend against such communications, according to Lichtblau amp; Risen (2005), â€Å"Under a presidential order signed in 2002, the intelligence agency has monitored the international telephone calls and international e-mail messages of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people inside the United States without warrants over the past three years in an effort to track possible ‘dirty numbers’ linked to Al Qaeda, the officials said. The agency, they said, still seeks warrants to monitor entirely domestic communications†. The sole purpose of the NSA program was to safeguard our national security in a more expansive, efficient manner. The center on law and security (2007) states â€Å"†¦this requirement to demonstrate all of the substantive and procedural elements of FISA to the Attorney General’s satisfaction before any surveillance can begin, would fatally impair the President’s ability to carry out his constitutional responsibility to collect foreign intelligence to protect our Nation from attack† (p. 9). Any implementation involving citizen’s privacy is assured to draw controversy, and the root of the problem with this program was a management issue. The President, DCI, and the Director of the NSA should have informed the head of the Senate Select and Congressional oversight committees with a more in depth understanding of the changes and the secrecy. A plan should have been in place to deal with leaks to the public of the changes, and a more detailed description of the amendment to the policy should have been created and kept under lock and key. Intelligence collection involves many activities that citizens (lacking all of the facts), may deem unconstitutional. The problem with this is most of the time the facts are not available to the general population, media, and even certain members of the Congressional oversight committees, for fear of an operation leak. Much of what the IC does must remain secret, at least until the aftermath (which could be years later). In regards to the topic at hand, authorization of warrantless wireless intercept by the NSA, the main problem arose due to management failures in the implementation of such a controversial topic. The center on law and security (2007) states, â€Å"Critics of the NSA program do not necessarily object to the type of surveillance, but rather to the way in which it has been authorized, and to the absence of any oversight† (p. 10). The Congressional oversight committees serve as a checks and balance to the IC and the President informed the heads of the committees (Gang of Eight) of his plan to authorize wireless intercepts on Americans. Cummings (2006) states, â€Å"†¦the executive branch had limited its briefings of the legislative branch to the Gang of Eight. They further asserted that the executive branch had prohibited them from sharing any information about the program with congressional colleagues† (p. 7). In the aftermath, it seems the Gang of Eight did not understand the necessity of secrecy behind this information. The President should have explained the reasoning behind the secrecy and why the information was limited to the Gang of Eight. If the Gang of Eight understood the parameters and restrictions in place, they could better defend the plan when future problems arose. Preparations hould have been in place for dealing with the public if and when the time came that the media caught wind of the wireless intercept. At some point the President should expect that the public would have to be addressed with some details defending his actions. There should have been regulations in place, describing the limits the NSA still had to endure when it came to U. S. citizens. When reports came out in 2005, there was much confusion as to what exactly the President had authorized, and if there were limits in place for the NSA. A failure to properly address the issue allowed the media to run wild with stories, further outraging critics. Silence and secrecy only added to the problem of distrust of the IC. In preparation, President Bush should have had a detailed description of the amendment to the policy, with restrictions still in place for the NSA. This policy should have been dated at the time it went into effect, signed by the President, the DCI, the Director of NSA and the Gang of Eight and kept in the possession of the Director of the NSA. Having a signed document would serve the future purpose of showing there was knowledge of the parameters of the amended policy. If this policy had to become public (open source) at some point, it would hopefully show that Management had made an organized effort of implementing change and involved as many officials as possible under the current circumstances. The National Security Agency (NSA) has the task of protecting U. S. national security systems through the use of signal intelligence (SIGINT), to include COMINT. Prior to the President giving authorization to warrantless domestic eavesdropping following 9/11, the NSA had to obtain a court approved warrant in order to eavesdrop on a U. S. citizen’s communications, otherwise known as a FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) warrant. According to the center on law and security (2007) â€Å"FISA warrants require ‘probable cause’ to suspect that an individual is acting either for a ‘foreign power’ (including terrorist organizations) or as an ‘agent of a foreign power,’ a target (a cell phone, a computer, a BlackBerry, or a landline phone, for example), and that foreign intelligence be a ‘significant purpose’ of the warrant† (p. ). NSA is no stranger to negative public perception regarding their unconstitutional practices. This wireless intercept program put the agency’s reputation at stake once again. Reports of the NSA having access to most American’s phone records detailing their calls and communications is cause for concern for critics. Due to a lack of proper implementation, notifications and opportunity for oversight, the NSA and the IC has to climb another uphill battle to win back the trust of Americans. Dilanian (2011) states, â€Å"U. S. intelligence officials insist that the new surveillance powers have been crucial to stopping terrorist plots†. Hopefully, some of the more recent successes in the community can erase the impact of failures and the intelligence community can improve their reputation once again. References Cummings, Alfred (2006). Statutory procedures under which Congress is to be informed of U. S. intelligence activities, including covert actions: NSA domestic surveillance. Congressional Research Service Dilanian, Ken (2011). 9/11, ten years after, more surveillance; A legacy of watchful eyes; The government eavesdrops on U. S. citizens as never before. Los Angeles Times Aug 30, 2011. Tuesday Home Edition. Lichtblau, E. amp; Risen, J. (2005). Bush lets U. S. spy on callers without courts. The New York Times, Dec 16, 2005. doi: 942423341 The Center on Law and Security at the NYU school of Law (2007). The NSA wiretapping program. For The Record, 1(Jan) 1-16. How to cite Literal Intelligence Collection, Papers

Baron Manfried Von Richtofen The Red Baron free essay sample

Baron Manfried Von Richtofen: The Red Baron Essay, Research Paper Baron Manfried Von Richtofen was the best One of World War One. With confirmed putting to deaths coming in at around 80, he is the combatant one with the most putting to deaths of all time recorded-ever. However, he started out his calling as a soldier in the trenches, non as a pilot. During the conflict of the Somme, he saw his first aeroplane fly operating expense, and was instantly aquiline. He loved everything about winging, and his grandiloquent, chesty, and some would state determined, personality, made him a quick scholar, and clever mind. His flight calling started out instead easy in the first old ages of the war, but finally took on a torrential gait, and shortly after his twentieth putting to death, he was to be called the Red Baron. This moniker can be chiefly attributed to the fact that he flew a modified Fokker DR I triplane, which he had painted ruddy, so as to galvanize the enemies that he was contending. We will write a custom essay sample on Baron Manfried Von Richtofen The Red Baron or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Some say that he was like a devil when he flew, and that the existent ground he painted his plane red was to raise up images of winged deamons in his enemies # 8217 ; heads. His tactics were largely responsible for his repute, nevertheless. During the war, the Baron developed some of the most superb tactics of all time seen until so. He used methods neer earlier attempted, like faked engine flameouts, utilizing air brakes in the center of axial rotations to shorten the cringle distance, assailing from utmost angles, both above and below, and firing his guns before coming in scope to decelerate down his opposition. A pilot is no good if he doesn Ts have a plane to wing, nevertheless. And the Baron surely had a plane. His aircraft was made about wholly for him. It had arms built to his specifications, a larger engine, and was one of the lone triplane designs employed during the war. While his tactics were impressive, most of them were centered around manoeuvrability. His plane was by no means the fastest aircraft of the War, but with its particular design, it could outmanoeuvre, out-turn, and out wing most other planes flown. He put this manoeuvrability to his advantage, and it surely shows in his putting to deaths. A unkown pilot was heard stating, upon the Barons decease, # 8220 ; I hope he burned all the manner to hell. # 8221 ; Baron Manfried Von Richtofen embodies some of the best qualities of a combatant pilot yet seen. He was brave, honest, and brave, but he knew how to acquire the occupation done. His accomplishment, continuity, and tactics will most surely go down in the history books for a long clip. The Red Baron genuinely is the best one of World War One.