91–100 of 104 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
and so imho this increases your turnaround time for changes unless you are a real wizard with your tools, which is certainly possible
You don't have to be a wizard, just competent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find this post highly questionable. What is so hairy about C++ for an IDE exactly? It's strongly typed and yes, if you do too much C style stuff it may be a bit harder to navigate but if you stay in a clean OO world it should be very, very similar to Java. Microsoft put out a competent C++ IDE well over a decade ago and Borland has done so as well... It's my personal opinion that IDEs are in general superior to tex…
To write a good C++ IDE, you need to deal with macros, C++'s obscene syntax (There are what- four complete C++ parsers?), and you need to parse all sorts of Makefiles, or else no existing projects will work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
if you want to compare yourself to someone competent with an IDE, you better be a wizard
I think you're overestimating the difficulty of developing on the command line.
This is a nice list! However, I really think that increasing speed of development with better tools is a cornerstone of being one of those elite programmers, and vim<<eclipse, at least for Java! I haven't done C/C++ for some time... but I expected similar IDEs exist. "The way our development environment is set up though, there was really no good way to use Eclipse because everything is done on a remote development bo…
Unfortunately, your expectations would not be met. IDEs make up for their limited text-editing features by providing language-dependent, code-aware functionality. Because C++ is such a hairy language, IDEs aren't able to do much with it. They don't give you anything like the cushy, comprehensive support that IDEs provide for Java. With C++, giving up the relatively lame IDE features to get a powerful text editor is a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you're overestimating the difficulty of developing on the command line.
I'm really not. I've done both. IDEs were created because they make it more efficient to write code, do you really think this whole line of technological development was a mistake? Even a 10-20% decrease in time on average is huge.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm really not. I've done both. IDEs were created because they make it more efficient to write code, do you really think this whole line of technological development was a mistake? Even a 10-20% decrease in time on average is huge.
I think they were originally created for environments like Windows where the basic development tools weren't part of a normal operating system install.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To write a good C++ IDE, you need to deal with macros, C++'s obscene syntax (There are what- four complete C++ parsers?), and you need to parse all sorts of Makefiles, or else no existing projects will work.
I'd expect some games that had to be played with release engineering. If the code is properly modularized, this could be two separate processes where you develop your module with mock data and then deploy it into production. Is the opinion really that all the current IDEs suck - http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/visualc/default.aspx , http://www.eclipse.org/cdt/ , http://www.netbeans.org/features/cpp/ , http://www.bloo…
I will admit to not having tried devc++ or visualc. I would imagine that visualc might be able to solve the problem, since they can control the build system, and can hook into their compiler directly (last I checked, GCC made this very hard).
I'm also going to go out on a limb and suggest that you may be overestimating the pain points other people experience /not/ using an IDE.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd expect some games that had to be played with release engineering. If the code is properly modularized, this could be two separate processes where you develop your module with mock data and then deploy it into production. Is the opinion really that all the current IDEs suck - http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/visualc/default.aspx , http://www.eclipse.org/cdt/ , http://www.netbeans.org/features/cpp/ , http://www.bloo…
C++ does look similar to Java, but it's really not. Preprocessor magic + template magic + linking magic means pain. I will admit to not having tried devc++ or visualc. I would imagine that visualc might be able to solve the problem, since they can control the build system, and can hook into their compiler directly (last I checked, GCC made this very hard). I'm also going to go out on a limb and suggest that you may b…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd expect some games that had to be played with release engineering. If the code is properly modularized, this could be two separate processes where you develop your module with mock data and then deploy it into production. Is the opinion really that all the current IDEs suck - http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/visualc/default.aspx , http://www.eclipse.org/cdt/ , http://www.netbeans.org/features/cpp/ , http://www.bloo…
C++ does look similar to Java, but it's really not. Preprocessor magic + template magic + linking magic means pain. I will admit to not having tried devc++ or visualc. I would imagine that visualc might be able to solve the problem, since they can control the build system, and can hook into their compiler directly (last I checked, GCC made this very hard). I'm also going to go out on a limb and suggest that you may b…