1

According to Cambridge Dictionary

We use the pattern have + object + infinitive without to when we talk about instructing someone to do something. We use it to emphasise who performed the action.

My question is can the object be something instead of someone? For example

I have GCC compile my C programs.

1

Yes, your example works. But you can only do that in a limited number of situations.

You would not say "I have the vacuum clean my carpets", or "I have the oven cook some potatoes".

  • I guess it works only with somethings that are living or if someone is a something, Artificial intelligence perhaps? – SovereignSun Nov 23 '16 at 15:54
  • 1
    An organization with some agency: "I have the security company sweep my office for bugs", "I have the district court issue an injunction". A device that's a proxy for a person: "I have the answering machine take all my calls" – John Feltz Nov 23 '16 at 16:02
1

I do not like your version. I would say either of these two:

"I have GCC to compile my C programs." OK

"I use GCC to compile my C programs." Better

There is no sense in which you instruct GCC to do something. You command a computer to execute the GCC compiler along with parameters that specify where the program source is to be found.

  • 1
    This answer is misleading. I have GCC compile my programs and I have GCC to compile my programs are both valid, and mean entirely different things. – verbose Jan 25 '17 at 0:50
0

I guess it's possible, yet it's this construction that means "to give someone the responsibility to do something." [have + person + verb]

But these examples sound right to me:

  • Can I have the robot do the cleaning of the floor today?
  • I have my laptop bot remind of my daily tasks.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.