 |
|
 |
I recently stumbled on codeblocks and I was amazed at how well it works. It has a Visual Studio look to it with a lot of the Visual Studio editing features and look and it is also cross platform. The only thing is you need to grab a nightly build instead of the real release as the official release is 2 years old while the nightly build is constantly updated.
http://codeblocks.org/[^]
John
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
Hello!
OK, look at my VisualWx log thing:
12:51:31: wxWidgets directory is wrong
12:52:05: wxWidgets directory is wrong
12:54:37: Error: Can not enumerate files in directory 'C:\wxWidgets-2.6.1\lib\wx\include\' (error 3: the system cannot find the path specified.)
I fixed the first 2, the dir was wrong, but then I can't fix 3! There's no such dir as "C:\wxWidgets-2.6.1\lib\wx\include\" on my PC, just "C:\wxWidgets-2.6.1\lib\", there's no WX directory... I installed MinGW, then wxWidgets, and then VisualWx... did I miss on something? Thanks!
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
 |
You recommend DevC++.
eclipse/CDT also can use g++.
It's managed project file automatically generate makefike.
That is interesting feature of eclipse/CDT.
What is merit of Dec-C++ compared to eclipse/CDT
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
The merit is that you dont have to waste 300Mb of ram using rubish software like eclipse.
DevC++ is very light and works really well, to bad is made with delphi...
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
The only thing I find missing from Dev-C++ is a good resource editor. Their resource editor is practically a text editor. In fact I've looked a bit and there don't seem to be ANY decent free resource editors around.
Strange, it doesn't seem like all that complicated of a program. Just give me something to help lay out dialogs.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
Have a look at
http://wxdsgn.sourceforge.net/
It atleast fills the void of not having a form designer(wxWidgets) for Dev-C++.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
At least now, I have more alternatives to go for if were to do C++ stuff.
No need to bog down to .NET.
Sonork 100.41263:Anthony_Yio
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
 |
With DevC++, you have to create your own InitInstance(), while Visual do it for you... There is hardly resource editor, and no ClassWizard... And above all, no MSDN !
BTW, DevC++ produce a brighter code, have a nice GUI (but users don't really care), is fast, efficient, ...
Trying DevC++ when you're used to VisualC++ is a bit harsh, but comes to good habits
Worth a try, but don't expect to switch in minutes. If you're used to create slick code without DDX_Control or message maps, in less than one week you may have turned into DevC++ !
Kochise
In Code we trust !
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
DevC++ is a good development environment, But it lacks visual development thats why i recommended VisualWx for visual development. Using VisualWx is very simple you visually draw your screens (you choose the kind of framework you want MDI , SDI etc) you drag drop controls you associate events with controls and it generates code for you.
Home Page
Optimizations Site
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
Like in PhAB under QNX ? Cooool !
Kochise
In Code we trust !
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
I get the same feeling when I read the article. I think it would be much better if there was some type of example (screen shots ...) and discussion about how to use these things to replace VC++ and MFC.
John
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
This article was just an intro to the possible alternative for the people who are looking for an alternative. If you get all those tools which i descrobed earlier and try to play with them you will see thier isnt much of a difference to be explained there anyway.
Moreover i am going to start a series of articles on various issues developng with these tools.
Home Page
Optimizations Site
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
Gurvinder Singh wrote:
Moreover i am going to start a series of articles on various issues developng with these tools.
Good, Thanks. That will be very helpful.
John
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
Sourceforge has several projects based on GCC. If you are looking for full blow GCC + many others toolkits (GPL), LINUX is basically built using GCC, LINUX applications are built using GCC.
The compiler itself is not that difficult to use, especially if one has experienced with makefile. Sometimes, you can reuse VC IDE to do coding, but create an "external tools" to compile your code, which basically invoke the GCC make command.
It's true that GCC would be too complicated to use for beginner, but once you get used to it, you will find all hardwork is worth as you are now able to work on any platforms that support C/C++, there is not limit to your knowledge! Try it!
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
It is my opinion that the GUI toolkit Qt would be a better choice ...
Also, why not propose Mono ?
Sébastien
Intelligence shared is intelligence squared.
Homepage : http://www.slorion.webhop.org
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
Because Qt isn't adapted to MingW (yet).
Gisle V.
"If you feel paranoid it doesn't mean they're not after you!" -- Woody Allen
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
Sébastien Lorion wrote:
It is my opinion that the GUI toolkit Qt would be a better choice ...
Maybe but:
Single Platform
Developers, Professional Edition, Enterprise Edition
1 $ 1550 $ 2330
Qt DuoPack
Developers, Professional Edition, Enterprise Edition
1 $ 2325 $ 3495
This adds up to quite a bit for a single developer like me.
Neville Franks, Author of ED for Windows. Free Trial at www.getsoft.com
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
For non commercial usage, it is free since it is licensed under GPL.
If you use it for commercial purpose, I don't think less than 5000 $ for a very high quality portable GUI toolkit is pricey ... Some software cost more than that ...
Sébastien
Intelligence shared is intelligence squared.
Homepage : http://www.slorion.webhop.org
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
Sébastien Lorion wrote:
For non commercial usage, it is free since it is licensed under GPL.
No, this is unfortunately not the whole truth. Sébastien's statement only applies to the X11-based version of Qt - the Win32-based versions (which you'd need to write applications for Win32) is *not* free.
Admittedly, there is a "free" version, but it's severely outdated Qt2.3 and it comes in a binary-only package, thus not being debuggable.
This is very unfortunate, since Qt seems to be a really very nice approach.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
Opera, the great web/mail/news browser, is based on QT ! Thus, Opera is currently available on the following plateforms : http://www.opera.com/download/?custom=yes !
Kochise
In Code we trust !
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
So what?
This does not make Qt on Win32 a feasible platform for non-commercial developers, due to Trolltech's pricing/licensing schemes.
I did not state that Qt isn't available for the Win32 platform
- it is, but only as a commercial licence which is kinda expensive.
Far too expensive for non-professional or non-commercial developers.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
www.wxwindows.org is free for all projects.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
If you want an easy to use C++ framework that does not have GPL licensing restrictions, ands is free, you could try the VCF[^]
It's ready to go on Win32 and has a linux port in progress.
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire!
Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)!
SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0
0 rows returned
|
|
|
|
 |