3 ms·
The clangd extension is much better for me, assuming that you have or are able to generate a compile_commands.json (at least easy in cmake) and point clangd to
by tjoff 2y ago
The clangd extension is much better for me, assuming that you have or are able to generate a compile_commands.json (at least easy in cmake) and point clangd to it.
- chpatrick 2y agoI agree VS Code + clangd is probably the best C++ development experience I ever had.
- theptip 2y agoHow does it stack up vs. CLion?
- chpatrick 2y agoCLion was what I used before and it was way clunkier than VSCode with clangd. Complicated libraries like CGAL just weren't usable for auto-complete, but were instant with clangd.
- eulgro 2y agoIt doesn't, CLion is way better.
- chpatrick 2y agoI used CLion before I switched to clangd + vscode and it was orders of magnitude slower.
- tcbawo 2y agoWhat does it do better?
- okl 2y agoOne problem I always had with VSCode, is that it seems to fill up its autocomplete suggestions with "near-string-matches" from files all over the project. The jetbrains tools are quite strict in that regard and won't propose random string matches that don't fit semantically.
- digitaltensor 2y agoThat doesn't sound right. clangd should (and does) only suggest semantically valid suggestions. It's also much faster than the CLion's own C++ engine, though that might change with CLion Nova.
- txdv 2y agoI recently tried clangd with nvim and it was so good
- ReleaseCandidat 2y agoThere are generators for the compilation databases that work with Makefiles and other build systems, like Bear: https://github.com/rizsotto/Bear https://github.com/rizsotto/Bear
- Ragnarork 2y agoCame here to suggest Bear as well, very handy piece of software to generate the compilation database in a mostly tool-agnostic way.