5 ms·

Toolchain: MinGW, gcc 3.5, gdb 5.2 Yet it only runs on Windows? Thanks, but I do virtually all my C programming on Linux. The only thing Windows is useful for

by iam 15y ago

Toolchain: MinGW, gcc 3.5, gdb 5.2 Yet it only runs on Windows? Thanks, but I do virtually all my C programming on Linux. The only thing Windows is useful for is to cross compile to other targets (it's usually more work to set up Linux to cross compile to a target). Why anyone would write C on Windows for Windows I have no clue.

gaius 15y ago
Their front-end is written in C#, I guess that's what they were most familiar with building GUIs in. Perhaps there will be a Mono version in future.
- Meai 15y ago
  I just don't understand it, in this post for example http://tenaciousc.com/?p=1787 http://tenaciousc.com/?p=1787 he is talking about poking around in the kernel, but then he develops a Windows-only C IDE? Qt is perfect, I don't understand what the problem is.
  - avolcano 15y ago
    Is it that hard to imagine that maybe he's primarily a Windows user and has previous experience in C# and not Qt?
    - Meai 15y ago
      Hm, to me it is. If he knows C, he will know C++ too. Qt makes cross platform development trivial. Linux is a C stronghold. He knows the in&out of the Linux kernel, knows gdb and the gcc. He is making a C IDE, so why not program it in C with GTK+ if not Qt. Yes, all that stuff makes it hard to understand to be Windows-only.
      - gaius 15y ago
        When I need a GUI I still use Tcl/Tk, nowt wrong wi' the old ways and it works a treat on Windows too.
      - gte910h 15y ago
        > If he knows C, he will know C++ too. What? The two languages are only barely related as used in industry. Tons of people use C every day who wouldn't think about touching C++. C++ is rarely used compared to straight C in: OSes Micro-controllers Libraries Lots of users of C also think C++ is a horrid mistake for many application development efforts (hard to find engineers who do C++ right enough vs most other languages). And those same C people have rarely programmed in GUI environments as well.
        Meai 15y ago
        I agree that C++ is horrible, but I was under the impression that everyone who knows C would have at least learned C++ before discarding it, making it possible to at least use C++ libraries.
        gte910h 15y ago
        Naw, tons of EE's know enough C to not have to do assembler, but don't get C++ at all. Lots of other people know C because they do extensions for their preferred language. Lastly people know enough C++ to know they don't know C++ well enough to release software in it.
        antoarts 15y ago
        C++ is vastly different from C. I know C, yet I don't know C++.
piinbinary 15y ago
For linux there is always DDD
- gaius 15y ago
  DDD is suffering badly from lack of love... I fired it up on my Debian dev box the other day and it was painful to use, so unresponsive. A real shame, I remember when it was the power tool of choice. GDB + Emacs is very usable.
- iam 15y ago
  Eclipse has very sweet gdb integration, and is probably the best C/C++ IDE for Linux if people can get over the fact that it's written in Java and uses up gigs of ram. Nothing on Linux beats the C++ parser that Eclipse has (I tried everything and it feels like programming in the stone age unless it knows how to interpret templates and go to def/go to usages works). Heck, even on Windows probably only Visual Studio beats it, thanks to being written in speedier native code and already supporting C++0x intellisense. It's not as useful for C though since there's plenty of other IDEs that can do macro unfolding and if that's not even needed then just using your favorite text editor + cscope provides a fast way of traversing a call graph. That being said C/C++ IDEs are still decades behind Java or C#. Where's our dozens of automated refactorings that other languages have?
  - msbarnett 15y ago
    It's not a matter of IDEs having to "catch up". C and C++ weren't designed with the constraint that they had to be highly amenable to static analysis, so there's quite simply less that automated refactoring tools can know they can safely change without breaking anything.

by iam 15y ago

gaius 15y ago

Their front-end is written in C#, I guess that's what they were most familiar with building GUIs in. Perhaps there will be a Mono version in future.

Meai 15y ago
I just don't understand it, in this post for example http://tenaciousc.com/?p=1787 http://tenaciousc.com/?p=1787 he is talking about poking around in the kernel, but then he develops a Windows-only C IDE? Qt is perfect, I don't understand what the problem is.
- avolcano 15y ago
  Is it that hard to imagine that maybe he's primarily a Windows user and has previous experience in C# and not Qt?
  - Meai 15y ago
    Hm, to me it is. If he knows C, he will know C++ too. Qt makes cross platform development trivial. Linux is a C stronghold. He knows the in&out of the Linux kernel, knows gdb and the gcc. He is making a C IDE, so why not program it in C with GTK+ if not Qt. Yes, all that stuff makes it hard to understand to be Windows-only.
    - gaius 15y ago
      When I need a GUI I still use Tcl/Tk, nowt wrong wi' the old ways and it works a treat on Windows too.
    - gte910h 15y ago
      > If he knows C, he will know C++ too. What? The two languages are only barely related as used in industry. Tons of people use C every day who wouldn't think about touching C++. C++ is rarely used compared to straight C in: OSes Micro-controllers Libraries Lots of users of C also think C++ is a horrid mistake for many application development efforts (hard to find engineers who do C++ right enough vs most other languages). And those same C people have rarely programmed in GUI environments as well.
      - Meai 15y ago
        I agree that C++ is horrible, but I was under the impression that everyone who knows C would have at least learned C++ before discarding it, making it possible to at least use C++ libraries.
        gte910h 15y ago
        Naw, tons of EE's know enough C to not have to do assembler, but don't get C++ at all. Lots of other people know C because they do extensions for their preferred language. Lastly people know enough C++ to know they don't know C++ well enough to release software in it.
        antoarts 15y ago
        C++ is vastly different from C. I know C, yet I don't know C++.

piinbinary 15y ago

For linux there is always DDD

gaius 15y ago
DDD is suffering badly from lack of love... I fired it up on my Debian dev box the other day and it was painful to use, so unresponsive. A real shame, I remember when it was the power tool of choice. GDB + Emacs is very usable.
iam 15y ago
Eclipse has very sweet gdb integration, and is probably the best C/C++ IDE for Linux if people can get over the fact that it's written in Java and uses up gigs of ram. Nothing on Linux beats the C++ parser that Eclipse has (I tried everything and it feels like programming in the stone age unless it knows how to interpret templates and go to def/go to usages works). Heck, even on Windows probably only Visual Studio beats it, thanks to being written in speedier native code and already supporting C++0x intellisense. It's not as useful for C though since there's plenty of other IDEs that can do macro unfolding and if that's not even needed then just using your favorite text editor + cscope provides a fast way of traversing a call graph. That being said C/C++ IDEs are still decades behind Java or C#. Where's our dozens of automated refactorings that other languages have?
- msbarnett 15y ago
  It's not a matter of IDEs having to "catch up". C and C++ weren't designed with the constraint that they had to be highly amenable to static analysis, so there's quite simply less that automated refactoring tools can know they can safely change without breaking anything.