vc++ best ide?
g3r...@gmail.com
comes close to vc++, what others are there? the only other ide i've
really found is netbeans which is horrible
what do you use for development? i ask because i really have no idea
what most people use?
Kai-Uwe Bux
[snip]
> what do you use for development?
g++ and Xemacs.
Best
Kai-Uwe Bux
Chris Ahlstrom
this bit o' wisdom:
One fellow here really likes Netbeans.
Another really likes Eclipse.
I like gcc/g++, cgdb, and vim.
I don't really like VC++ (the IDE), except for debugging, and even that is
somewhat slow compared to debugging with cgdb on Linux.
--
The two things that can get you into trouble quicker than anything else
are fast women and slow horses.
thomas...@gmx.at
Maybe your should try Eclipse.
I have heard of a C++ support for Eclipse.
I use gcc + emacs.
Greetings Thomas Mertes
Seed7 Homepage: http://seed7.sourceforge.net
Seed7 - The extensible programming language: User defined statements
and operators, abstract data types, templates without special
syntax, OO with interfaces and multiple dispatch, statically typed,
interpreted or compiled, portable, runs under linux/unix/windows.
Noah Roberts
You'll find nothing that compares for debugging but eclipse works nice
on Linux and offers some nice features not available in VC.
We almost switched to Eclipse here but gdb and mingw just can't compete
with VS. For an OS project the support is pretty bad too.
Ian Collins
Sun CC and dbx with Xemacs.
--
Ian Collins
James Kanze
> [snip]> what do you use for development?
> [snip]
> g++ and Xemacs.
Any number of different compilers and vim. And GNU make.
--
James Kanze (GABI Software) email:james...@gmail.com
Conseils en informatique orientée objet/
Beratung in objektorientierter Datenverarbeitung
9 place Sémard, 78210 St.-Cyr-l'École, France, +33 (0)1 30 23 00 34
Ron AF Greve
<g3r...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:75701d11-34fc-4968...@q26g2000prq.googlegroups.com...
Never seen anything that comes close to VC++ under linux/unix. Eclipse is
nice however unlike VC++ that just runs out of the box it takes me always
quite some time to setup a project and still then....
But then again most applications I write professionally I just use vi and
g++. Just make it easy to log information by creating some logger class
(which will come in handy anyway) and you can actually stay away from the
gdb's and adb's etc. :-) And as an editor vi has of course its disadvantages
but sometimes I actually mis some of its regex power in the VC++ editor (I
know that got reg expresssions too but for some reason I never get the same
thing from it, as I get from vi :-( ).
Regards, Ron AF Greve.
http://informationsuperhighway.eu
Juha Nieminen
> And as an editor vi has of course its disadvantages
> but sometimes I actually mis some of its regex power in the VC++ editor (I
> know that got reg expresssions too but for some reason I never get the same
> thing from it, as I get from vi :-( ).
Then why don't you use vi? It has been ported to Windows.
Visual Studio in no way forces you to use its own editor for editing
the source code files. I use Visual Studio for my payjob, and I use (a
Windows port of) emacs to edit my files (for the simple reason that I
have been using emacs for that purpose for over 10 years and thus I'm so
accustomed to it).
When I want to compile, I simply switch (alt-tab) to Visual Studio and
hit F7 (to compile). Visual Studio automatically sees if any file has
been modified when it gets focus, even if that file was currently being
displayed in its editor. (At least there's something MS has done right.)
Naturally when compiling it will also detect any changed file, like
'make' would.
g3r...@gmail.com
thanks for all the replys, i can see most coding is done in text
editors and not ide's, never knew that
KjellKod
Both have their ups & downs. If you want a cross-platform usage I
recommend Eclipse since setting it up with different compilers &
debuggers is easier done than in VC++, although I've done that too for
VC++/Qt projects.
If you're working on Linux I personally like the KDE application
KDevelop. I read somewhere that they're coming with a cross-platform
version so that you can use it on Windows but I haven't seen it so
maybe they're not there just yet.
A lot of old-timers use simple text editors or more advanced ones like
XEmacs,. but easy integrated functionality makes in my mind a good IDE
way better. Especially if it comes to introduce new people to a
project.
Good Luck
/ Kjell
Rolf Magnus
> On Dec 19, 6:31 pm, Kai-Uwe Bux <jkherci...@gmx.net> wrote:
>> g3r...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> [snip]> what do you use for development?
>
>> [snip]
>
>> g++ and Xemacs.
>
> Any number of different compilers and vim. And GNU make.
Same here except that it's any number of different g++ compilers (for
different target platforms) and gvim. And for revision control (which I
consider essential for any kind of serious software development), svn,
Leandro Melo
My preferred C++ IDE is also VC++. On Linux, I work with Eclipse/CDT.
I like it too. It's been getting better over the years, but still not
as good as VC++. In particular, I find the debugging features of VC++
great!
--
Leandro T. C. Melo
Rolf Magnus
> On Dec 20, 3:58 am, Juha Nieminen <nos...@thanks.invalid> wrote:
>> Ron AF Greve wrote:
>> > And as an editor vi has of course its disadvantages
>> > but sometimes I actually mis some of its regex power in the VC++ editor
>> > (I know that got reg expresssions too but for some reason I never get
>> > the same thing from it, as I get from vi :-( ).
>>
>> Then why don't you use vi? It has been ported to Windows.
>>
>> Visual Studio in no way forces you to use its own editor for editing
>> the source code files. I use Visual Studio for my payjob, and I use (a
>> Windows port of) emacs to edit my files (for the simple reason that I
>> have been using emacs for that purpose for over 10 years and thus I'm so
>> accustomed to it).
>>
>> When I want to compile, I simply switch (alt-tab) to Visual Studio and
>> hit F7 (to compile).
Well, I hit F7 in vim to compile. It automatically saves all changes before
running make. After building, it automatically jumps to the first error or
warning. No need for Visual Studio.
> thanks for all the replys, i can see most coding is done in text
> editors and not ide's, never knew that
I think both is done. An IDE hides a lot of stuff, and IMHO, for learning
purposes, it's good to know what's going on behind the scense. And getting
an initial makefile to start with isn't really hard. Then you can use any
editor you like, and you'll always be able to get along without an IDE.
James Kanze
> Ron AF Greve wrote:
> > And as an editor vi has of course its disadvantages but
> > sometimes I actually mis some of its regex power in the VC++
> > editor (I know that got reg expresssions too but for some
> > reason I never get the same thing from it, as I get from vi
> > :-( ).
The most important thing I find in vi or emacs (or their
derivitives) is the ability to pipe parts of the file through an
external filter. But regular expressions aren't far behind. (I
often find myself using argdo in (g)vim, but there are other
solutions to that. And (g)vimdiff remains by far the best tool
I've seen for merging different versions.)
> Then why don't you use vi? It has been ported to Windows.
> Visual Studio in no way forces you to use its own editor for
> editing the source code files. I use Visual Studio for my
> payjob, and I use (a Windows port of) emacs to edit my files
> (for the simple reason that I have been using emacs for that
> purpose for over 10 years and thus I'm so accustomed to it).
> When I want to compile, I simply switch (alt-tab) to Visual
> Studio and hit F7 (to compile). Visual Studio automatically
> sees if any file has been modified when it gets focus, even if
> that file was currently being displayed in its editor. (At
> least there's something MS has done right.)
Does it somehow force the other editor to save the file, if
you've forgotten that? Obviously, personal habits and
weaknesses will vary, but I find forgetting to save to be one of
my biggest problems when I'm not invoking make from within the
editor. (vi, vim and I think emacs all have options which will
automatically save all modified files anytime you escape to the
shell from them, so even if you don't use the built in make
command directly, you're safe.)
> Naturally when compiling it will also detect any changed file,
> like 'make' would.
Visual Studio invokes MS's version of make, or at least it did
once upon a time.
James Kanze
> g3r...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Dec 20, 3:58 am, Juha Nieminen <nos...@thanks.invalid> wrote:
> >> Ron AF Greve wrote:
> >> > And as an editor vi has of course its disadvantages but
> >> > sometimes I actually mis some of its regex power in the
> >> > VC++ editor (I know that got reg expresssions too but for
> >> > some reason I never get the same thing from it, as I get
> >> > from vi :-( ).
> >> Then why don't you use vi? It has been ported to Windows.
> >> Visual Studio in no way forces you to use its own editor
> >> for editing the source code files. I use Visual Studio for
> >> my payjob, and I use (a Windows port of) emacs to edit my
> >> files (for the simple reason that I have been using emacs
> >> for that purpose for over 10 years and thus I'm so
> >> accustomed to it).
> >> When I want to compile, I simply switch (alt-tab) to Visual
> >> Studio and hit F7 (to compile).
> Well, I hit F7 in vim to compile. It automatically saves all
> changes before running make. After building, it automatically
> jumps to the first error or warning. No need for Visual
> Studio.
Yes, and the editor is somewhat more powerful (although from
what I've heard, Visual Studio's editor is no slouch
either---but since I develop on Solaris and Linux, I've never
had the occasion to learn it well).
> > thanks for all the replys, i can see most coding is done in
> > text editors and not ide's, never knew that
> I think both is done. An IDE hides a lot of stuff, and IMHO,
> for learning purposes, it's good to know what's going on
> behind the scense. And getting an initial makefile to start
> with isn't really hard. Then you can use any editor you like,
> and you'll always be able to get along without an IDE.
Funny, I would have thought the opposite. When learning, you
don't really want to have to learn everything at once; not
having to learn make is a definite advantage if you're still
struggling with the C++ basics. Later, of course, when you're
in an industrial environement (and using the team's makefiles),
none of the IDE's I've seen (including Visual Studios) seem to
have any advantage over an editor with a built-in make command;
the difference comes down to the editor (and I do know people
who use Visual Studios because they prefer its editor to vi or
emacs).
Juha Nieminen
> Does it somehow force the other editor to save the file, if
> you've forgotten that? Obviously, personal habits and
> weaknesses will vary, but I find forgetting to save to be one of
> my biggest problems when I'm not invoking make from within the
> editor.
Since the days I coded in DOS over 10 years ago I learned the habit of
constantly saving (because DOS and/or the program I was using to code
was rather prone to crashing). I do it almost after each written line of
code (or at least after each significant programming construct, eg. a
loop body). It's so ingrained that I do it almost automatically.
Nowadays that habit would be less important because neither linux nor
windows crash basically ever, nor the programs I use. However, I still
find the habit useful, so I haven't bothered unlearning it.
If it ever happens that eg. there's a power outage in the middle of a
coding session, I will not have to curse everybody to the deepest pits
of h*** because of losing several hours of work, because I constantly
save. :)
Clyde
Chris Ahlstrom
this bit o' wisdom:
> g3r...@gmail.com wrote:
There are plenty of front ends for gdb, and gdb has some features that
the VS debugger does not.
Check out this book:
http://oreilly.com/catalog/9781593271749/
The Art of Debugging with GDB, DDD, and Eclipse
By Norman Matloff, Peter Jay Salzman
September 2008
Publisher: No Starch Press
Even though I've been using gdb for awhile, I learned some new tricks from
this book.
--
Far duller than a serpent's tooth it is to spend a quiet youth.
Gerhard Fiedler
> Does it somehow force the other editor to save the file, if
> you've forgotten that? Obviously, personal habits and
> weaknesses will vary, but I find forgetting to save to be one of
> my biggest problems when I'm not invoking make from within the
> editor.
I often use CodeWright, and I have it configured to save files on loss
of focus -- quite handy for exactly this reason. I'd be surprised if
highly scriptable editors like emacs etc. couldn't be coerced to do
this, too.
Gerhard
James Kanze
Now that's a good idea. A quick check shows that vim does have
FocusGained and FocusLost events which can be used to trigger
commands; it shouldn't be too hard to make it automatically
write every time you leave the window. (You need to add a
little bit of code to ensure that it won't try to write files
you're viewing in write protected mode, but otherwise, it's
trivial.)
(Of course, most of the time, it's easier just to invoke the
built in make, which also results in a small window with the
error messages, and allows navigating between the error lines.
But there are times when there's no make file, and I just want
to invoke a command quickly.)
Brice Gagnage
> Code::Blocks
>
> www.codeblocks.org
So far Code::Blocks is the closest IDE to VC++ under *nix. Highly customizable.
Cheers,
--
Brice Gagnage
Daniel de Kok
If you use the Qt library, the new QtCreator IDE is also becoming
quite good. Though, it may be less useful for non-Qt projects, because
it integrates tightly with qmake projects. Though, it seems that the
latest version also has CMake support.
Take care,
Daniel
asm23
plug-in functionality.
Rui Maciel
> thanks for all the replys, i can see most coding is done in text
> editors and not ide's, never knew that
Well, IDE is a marketing-driven acronym that is supposed to mean integrated development environment, which is nothing more than a fancy name given to a software package comprised of a fancy text editor, a compiler, a build system and usually also a debugger. If you'd like, you can also bundle vim, GCC and gdb and call that an IDE. Oh, and don't forget to charge ungodly gobs of money for it, too.
Rui Maciel
Jeff Schwab
Multiple vendors once tried to impose Eclipse-based development
methodologies on a group of engineers with which I used to work. There
were some objections, which were met by management with the usual, daft
assumption that the engineers must not have tried IDEs before, and did
not appreciate how "powerful" they were. Once of my coworkers
responded, very wisely I think, that with Vim on Linux, his whole system
was an IDE.
Of course, there are various extensible editors; the important thing is
that the editor interacts smoothly with the rest of the system, as
opposed to the IDE philosophy of trying to make one tool do everything
on its own.
James Kanze
The point is that regardless of the rest of the system, you'll
be spending 90% or more of your time in the editor. So it had
better be good. Not just for C++, of course, but for all of the
rest as well. (Which is difficult, because I don't know of an
editor which is good for English HTML requirement
specifications, C++ and UML.) The second important thing is
that the build system be flexible with regards to integrating
automatically generated code; practically speaking you can't
communicate with the outside world without it, and it also makes
a lot of internal jobs easier. And you'll want a powerful
scripting language, for all of the repetitive maintenance jobs.
Those are the criteria. Beyond that, I'm used to using a
command line interface, and find it faster than navigating
through three or four menus, but that's a personal choice; both
should be available.
g3r...@gmail.com
thanks for all the replys, value every one of them
x