Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | David Dyer-Bennet <dd-b@dd-b.net> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code |
| References | (6 earlier) <jefa2h$6ms$1@speranza.aioe.org> <jefemv$9u1$1@dont-email.me> <pa7h0zgwyd.fsf@news.eternal-september.org> <ylfkk44zxq0x.fsf@dd-b.net> <xwy5tfffu3.fsf@news.eternal-september.org> |
| Date | 2012-01-10 15:45 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <ylfk62gjxmdo.fsf@dd-b.net> (permalink) |
| Organization | ipHouse - Welcome Home! |
Richard <rgrdev_@gmail.com> writes: > David Dyer-Bennet <dd-b@dd-b.net> writes: > >> Richard <rgrdev_@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> IDEs, well done, are a real boon. I can only assume you never used one >>> or worked with any considerably sized code base that allows context >>> help, auto class completions, refactoring, JIT debugging etc etc. >> >> In theory, an IDE could be a good thing -- though it tends to lock you >> into a set of tools rather than letting you choose individually, which >> is a big problem. > > Not if it can be configured to use external tools. Yes. In theory, it could be a good thing. But I've never actually encountered one that actualized that possibility. >> I've never actually used one that was better than the non-IDE >> environments I've programmed in, though. Visual Studio in particular is >> a total disaster, especially for C and C++ code. We get random build > > I think thats down to your set up. VS can be intrusive but millions use > it daily with a lot of success. Nearly always for very small projects. > And jut look at Apple and their IDE and the satisfaction ratings. Never seen it, I've heard serious complaints about the lack of alternatives. > I am NOT saying discrete tools are a bad thing but bringing them all > together in an INTEGRATED UI can be a good thing. > > I use emacs as and IDE and its benefits outweigh the disadvantages : but > I dont try to convince myself its good at debugging, completion, context > help etc, Its not. The editor is the most important tool, so that's where I live, yes. But the gdb integration IS pretty useful in my experience. Doesn't do class browsing, that's the bit that looked hopeful in VS -- but it doesn't deliver, it just doesn't work in C++. (Works pretty well for C# though.) -- David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b@dd-b.net; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Writing "absolutely" portable code ArifulHossain tuhin <etothepowerpi@gmail.com> - 2012-01-09 02:26 -0800
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ec429 <ec429@cam.ac.uk> - 2012-01-09 11:47 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-01-09 13:56 +0100
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ArifulHossain tuhin <etothepowerpi@gmail.com> - 2012-01-09 05:45 -0800
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ec429 <ec429@cam.ac.uk> - 2012-01-09 14:46 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ArifulHossain tuhin <etothepowerpi@gmail.com> - 2012-01-10 01:11 -0800
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-09 15:58 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code falk@rahul.net (Edward A. Falk) - 2012-01-09 18:41 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-09 12:23 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-01-09 08:45 -0500
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code superpollo <superpollo@tznvy.pbz> - 2012-01-09 15:02 +0100
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-01-09 16:11 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ArifulHossain tuhin <etothepowerpi@gmail.com> - 2012-01-09 05:56 -0800
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-09 15:07 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ArifulHossain tuhin <etothepowerpi@gmail.com> - 2012-01-10 01:21 -0800
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-01-10 13:20 -0600
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ArifulHossain tuhin <etothepowerpi@gmail.com> - 2012-01-11 06:57 -0800
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-11 09:23 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-01-09 13:48 +0100
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ec429 <ec429@cam.ac.uk> - 2012-01-09 13:11 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-09 05:27 -0800
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ec429 <ec429@cam.ac.uk> - 2012-01-09 13:41 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ArifulHossain tuhin <etothepowerpi@gmail.com> - 2012-01-09 06:09 -0800
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-01-09 14:35 +0100
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-01-09 13:44 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ArifulHossain tuhin <etothepowerpi@gmail.com> - 2012-01-09 06:18 -0800
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-01-09 18:59 +0100
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-01-09 19:01 +0100
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ec429 <ec429@cam.ac.uk> - 2012-01-09 19:21 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Richard <rgrdev_@gmail.com> - 2012-01-10 20:48 +0100
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code David Dyer-Bennet <dd-b@dd-b.net> - 2012-01-10 14:26 -0600
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Richard <rgrdev_@gmail.com> - 2012-01-10 21:44 +0100
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code David Dyer-Bennet <dd-b@dd-b.net> - 2012-01-10 15:45 -0600
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-11 09:12 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ec429 <ec429@cam.ac.uk> - 2012-01-11 11:10 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-01-11 11:52 -0500
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ec429 <ec429@cam.ac.uk> - 2012-01-11 17:01 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-01-11 12:11 -0500
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-11 09:08 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-11 08:22 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-11 08:54 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ec429 <ec429@cam.ac.uk> - 2012-01-09 13:57 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2012-01-09 19:21 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ec429 <ec429@cam.ac.uk> - 2012-01-09 19:52 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2012-01-09 20:20 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ArifulHossain tuhin <etothepowerpi@gmail.com> - 2012-01-09 06:16 -0800
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ArifulHossain tuhin <etothepowerpi@gmail.com> - 2012-01-09 06:02 -0800
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-01-09 14:50 -0800
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-01-09 23:20 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-10 00:23 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Dirk Zabel <zabel@riccius-sohn.eu> - 2012-01-10 17:44 +0100
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ArifulHossain tuhin <etothepowerpi@gmail.com> - 2012-01-11 07:13 -0800
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Nick Bowler <nbowler@draconx.ca> - 2012-01-17 20:36 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ec429 <ec429@cam.ac.uk> - 2012-01-17 23:06 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code blp@cs.stanford.edu (Ben Pfaff) - 2012-01-17 15:32 -0800
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-01-18 00:40 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2012-01-18 18:35 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-01-18 19:15 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2012-01-21 21:32 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-01-18 07:26 +0100
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code "Joachim Schmitz" <nospam.jojo@schmitz-digital.de> - 2012-01-18 11:07 +0100
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2012-01-21 21:32 +0000
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-22 10:42 +1300
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-01-22 18:53 +0100
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-01-22 19:00 +0100
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-01-23 19:28 +0100
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-01-18 08:44 -0600
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code James Dow Allen <jdallen2000@yahoo.com> - 2012-01-18 07:09 -0800
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-01-18 17:44 +0100
Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2012-01-18 07:58 +0000
csiph-web