4 ms·

Aside from the fact that JetBrains make incredible IDEs, basing it around CMake is a great idea as it means project files that aren't tied to a specific platfor

Aside from the fact that JetBrains make incredible IDEs, basing it around CMake is a great idea as it means project files that aren't tied to a specific platform or IDE. You can develop a project in CLion just as easily as you could with vim and the build instructions would be the same. I very much hope this is the future and the tooling around CMake is improved too. In my perfect world, this would include dependency management - even if that just meant a reference to versioned sources that you could easily include in a project file and the tooling was responsible for pulling them down and building them.

hobarrera 12y ago
The big downside about JetBrains' IDEs is that they work and look absolutely awful on OpenJDK on linux, and there's no way around it.
- fotcorn 12y ago
  This is a thing of the past, see pycharm 3.4 Pro: http://i.imgur.com/HSUKxDo.png http://i.imgur.com/HSUKxDo.png Running on Ubuntu 12.04 LTS with this JVM: $ java -version java version "1.7.0_55" OpenJDK Runtime Environment (IcedTea 2.4.7) (7u55-2.4.7-1ubuntu1~0.12.04.2) OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 24.51-b03, mixed mode)
  - dubcanada 12y ago
    Looks the exact same as Windows with Oracle JDK.
  - Redoubts 12y ago
    This is not a thing of the past. Font rendering is still significantly different between java and non-java apps, and in my opinion appears distinctly wrong in java: http://i.imgur.com/tpsl4BH.png http://i.imgur.com/tpsl4BH.png Java on left vs terminal and native editor.
- Igglyboo 12y ago
  Honestly I couldn't tell the difference visually, but it was much slower using OpenJDK as opposed to Oracle on Ubuntu 14.04
duaneb 12y ago
I truly hope people aren't choosing their build systems based on the IDE they use. If you program C++, you will have to use some combination of a dozen strange autoconf/Make solutions, CMake, boost::jam, scons, rake, etc. If you work at a big corporation, you'll probably have a custom build tool. Any ide worth a damn will either be build tool agnostic or it won't be useful to the majority of the target market.
- tomlu 12y ago
  Then it has to have its own build system, with its own descriptor files, so you're maintaining two build systems anyway. Might as well pick one of the existing ones.
  - duaneb 12y ago
    > Then it has to have its own build system, with its own descriptor files ...Why? Just interface with the existing build system. Most have very clear semantics, and it's not clear anything is gained from prioritizing one over the other. All the ide needs to worry about is generally syntax highlighting, targets, flags (e.g. to enable debugging), and the STANDARDIZED error reporting. Also, gyp, ninja.... so many build systems. CMake only has a fraction of the market, and not even an impressive one.

hobarrera 12y ago

The big downside about JetBrains' IDEs is that they work and look absolutely awful on OpenJDK on linux, and there's no way around it.

fotcorn 12y ago
This is a thing of the past, see pycharm 3.4 Pro: http://i.imgur.com/HSUKxDo.png http://i.imgur.com/HSUKxDo.png Running on Ubuntu 12.04 LTS with this JVM: $ java -version java version "1.7.0_55" OpenJDK Runtime Environment (IcedTea 2.4.7) (7u55-2.4.7-1ubuntu1~0.12.04.2) OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 24.51-b03, mixed mode)
- dubcanada 12y ago
  Looks the exact same as Windows with Oracle JDK.
- Redoubts 12y ago
  This is not a thing of the past. Font rendering is still significantly different between java and non-java apps, and in my opinion appears distinctly wrong in java: http://i.imgur.com/tpsl4BH.png http://i.imgur.com/tpsl4BH.png Java on left vs terminal and native editor.
Igglyboo 12y ago
Honestly I couldn't tell the difference visually, but it was much slower using OpenJDK as opposed to Oracle on Ubuntu 14.04

duaneb 12y ago

I truly hope people aren't choosing their build systems based on the IDE they use. If you program C++, you will have to use some combination of a dozen strange autoconf/Make solutions, CMake, boost::jam, scons, rake, etc. If you work at a big corporation, you'll probably have a custom build tool. Any ide worth a damn will either be build tool agnostic or it won't be useful to the majority of the target market.

tomlu 12y ago
Then it has to have its own build system, with its own descriptor files, so you're maintaining two build systems anyway. Might as well pick one of the existing ones.
- duaneb 12y ago
  > Then it has to have its own build system, with its own descriptor files ...Why? Just interface with the existing build system. Most have very clear semantics, and it's not clear anything is gained from prioritizing one over the other. All the ide needs to worry about is generally syntax highlighting, targets, flags (e.g. to enable debugging), and the STANDARDIZED error reporting. Also, gyp, ninja.... so many build systems. CMake only has a fraction of the market, and not even an impressive one.