C++ Looking for a functioning IDE for C++

It's overrated anyway. Having a cockpit style development environment is pretty useless and doesn't improve anything. Why do 100 program functions need to be immediately available in 1 window? I think you can uninstall the WM too if you're there...
 
elephant said:
To facilitate "pair programming" style collaboration, you were not allowed to customize it to your preferences so that someone else could jump to do something - with no suprises.
Click to expand...
This is close to the issues with IDEs. They assume i.e a specific formatting convention. Most developers work on such as wide variety of codebases, each with their own standards that modifying the autoformat is a full time job. Whats really frustrating is that so many IDEs do not have clean ways to simply disable all autoformat which is sometimes the best solution (Visual Studio can't fully do it and NetBeans doesn't even attempt with the last revision I tried (including Oracle Developer Studio).

elephant said:
When I started programming, there were no IDEs, no tmux, no screen. If you wanted "source" debugging, you grabbed two VT220 terminals, and ran a debugger in one terminal with the source code open in the other. Single step debugger in left terminal, and then press the down-arrow in the right arrow. I do not miss those days.
Click to expand...
For me, this is still the way quite honestly. Works well over SSH where I see a number of collegues struggle with the pretty poor VSCode SSH integration. Debuggers like lldb and gdb are first rate. The cli tools have so many more features than most attempts at wrapping them with a GUI.

Though I tend to use job control (ctrl-z, fg, etc) rather than multiple terminals. But this does have the disadvantage that Windows SSH, whilst rare to use, simply has no job control (Microsoft thinks this is job control but really that is just background process that can't ever be reattached so f-ing useless)
 
Sniff++ was an excellent IDE, but it's gone. IDK, but chances are the company was target of a M&A and the codebase was integrated into another IDE or the product was just renamed. Would be interesting to know if an successor is still availabe s/wh.
 
When it comes to using a debugger:

I like being able to set breakpoints directly in the edit buffer as well as the next person. But in practice my debugging needs quickly evolve to the point where I need extensive .gdbinit statements, and that gets me back to commandline use whether I have an ide or not.

Also keep in mind that even if you can't invoke gdb from your editor, it works the other way round. When you are on a frame in a backtrace in gdb you can just say "edit" and an editor for that source location will pop up. Very handy. Even works for kernel debugging.

The last IDE I used was Borland Turbo C 2.0.
 
A bunch of printf statements is all you need for debugging.

8eb-3172428839.jpg

programmerhumor-io-debugging-memes-programming-memes-b732cd8ea00bd7d-406124875.jpg
 
MG said:
It's overrated anyway. Having a cockpit style development environment is pretty useless and doesn't improve anything. Why do 100 program functions need to be immediately available in 1 window? I think you can uninstall the WM too if you're there...
Click to expand...
So a lot of people call it "modern" but its popularity rose due to a technical limitation on DOS (i.e MS-DOS), where multi-tasking was so poor, that an all-in-one monolithic program became the norm for student/hobby developers using that platform back in the day. Then as they entered the industry, they brought this idea with them.

Individual tools is so much more resilient. Especially in embedded where you really aren't going to change entire IDE just to use a different chip (i.e MPLAB X for PIC, then µVision for (some) 8051, etc..). This is why gdb-stub exists for some of the more featureful MCUs.
 
kpedersen said:
So a lot of people call it "modern" but its popularity rose due to a technical limitation on DOS (i.e MS-DOS), where multi-tasking was so poor, that an all-in-one monolithic program became the norm for student/hobby developers using that platform back in the day. Then as they entered the industry, they brought this idea with them.

Individual tools is so much more resilient. Especially in embedded where you really aren't going to change entire IDE just to use a different chip (i.e MPLAB X for PIC, then µVision for (some) 8051, etc..). This is why gdb-stub exists for some of the more featureful MCUs.
Click to expand...
I think it was actually a scam to make a protected mode multitasking OS look superior. Everything in Windows 95 graphics mode was suddenly proprietary and DOS stayed limited to SVGA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top