Does anyone know of a good, free IDE for windows which is not emacs, VI or vide? I like using Anjuta when I have linux available, but I don't know of anything similar for windows (except visual studio, which I cannot afford. :().
Name:
Anonymous2005-06-28 17:01
eclipse
eric3
jedit
Name:
Anonymous2005-06-28 17:04
GVIM
Name:
Anonymous2005-06-28 17:30
>>3 I specifically excluded vi >>2 Thanks! I'll google those :)
Name:
Anonymous2005-06-28 20:27
For C/C++ there's Dev-C++. It's not brilliant, but it gets the job done.
>>6>>7 they all use the same paradigm; so for the sake of discussion; they are close enough (for gods' sake, >>1 is looking for a visual studio clone, not a full-screen version of fucking ex!)
Name:
Anonymous2005-06-30 3:17
have you used GVIM for windows? It is totally idiotified.
I have one time when my computer fried itself and I had to use my wife's lapdog which was running Windows at the time. GVim fucking sucks. Real Vim is awesome.
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-02 4:18
I recommend xemacs.
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-02 16:50
Fuck's sake, xemacs is close enough to emacs to not count.
And only a crackhead could recommend anything like emacs. :)
(holy war is the next thread down, please)
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-02 20:16
for windows visual studio > *
for linux/unix kdevelop > *
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-02 21:08
UltraEdit > /.*/
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-03 10:48
>> visual studio
ew
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-05 14:10
>>15 Project management; it's something that Anjuta does well, visual studio does well (from what little I've used it) and kdevelop does well.
Who cares if we can keep the vi vs emacs and klugdy vs modern wars going on
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-06 11:08
Yeah, two threads, this is awesome.
We should try to get a decent Linux vs BSD holy war up as well.
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-06 14:16
zOMG BSD sux man ha ha
Hmm... I'm not too good at it. I haven't even played with BSD (although I admit actually knowing the other product to the same degree is of very little importance for VIM-Emacs, Perl-PHP, Linux-BSD, Windows-Linux wars).
There's one thing I like better from BSD: the licence. What's up with "the only freedom is THIS freedom?" Viral licenses are not exactly my idea of free.
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-06 15:50
Sorry (perl et al.) vs php is not a holywar it is a struggle against stupidity.
Lol, see what I said? BTW, have you checked GameFAQs yet? You'd feel at home.
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-07 4:16
>>29
Even Eric Raymond is publicly saying that now. I think we're going to see a rise in non-GPL open source licences in new software projects over the next few years.
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-07 4:22
Lol the GPL license isn't viral. You voluntarily include other people's source code thus you have to abide by it. GPL also makes sure everyone else has the same rights you and the author had.
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-07 6:22
the GPL license isn't viral
You've misunderstood what they mean by viral. It most certainly is (not that there's anything wrong with that).
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-07 6:48
Yes! Licence holywar! This board has the lowest s/n ratio EVER!
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-07 11:20
>>33 ESR is a jagermiester swilling redneck gun nut, and a whore besides. If he thought that saying that Bill Gates has the biggest schlong would give him five minutes of press coverage, he'd say it.
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-08 4:42
>> Bill Gates has the biggest schlong
Another example of Microshaft software bloat.
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-08 5:34
But admittedly, GPL is not so free. This "same rights" thing is not there to grant you righs, but to restrict them to what some hippy thought free software had to be like. And BSD and MPL are two much better views on freedom.
I've never released anything as GPL. My license.txt, 40 KB shorter than most others', just says I did the thing, you can do whatever you want with it providing you credit me for what I did somewhere visible in the credits (a file, etc.), and since I'm releasing it freely, you can take it, throw it in a box, and get rich selling it (all I need is my credit); in such case you'd win and I'd lose for not realizing I was releasing something I could sell, and you deserve the money you've got. This is pretty much the Vorbis license AFAIK.
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-08 6:25
gpl = free for community
bsd = free for you
that's how it works, you have worthless americans who only think about themselves (BSD) and then you have your socialists who care about other people (GPL)
BSD is good for protocols and shit you want everyone to use. GPL is if you want credit and you want to protect your rights while still giving everyone the same rights and never allowing someone to take those rights away
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-08 7:26
GPL is if you want credit and you want to protect your rights while still giving everyone the same rights and never allowing someone to take those rights away
So, it's basically the same as the BSD license except that you can't incorporate the code without giving back any modifications :O?
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-08 9:58
The GPL levels the playing feild. If you're a business and you're considering releasing code, it's in your best interest to do so under a license which says "any changes you make you have to share". That way your competitors can't simply make off with your IP and then fuck you over (since they have to share as well).
This is why most corporations either choose the GPL, or (stupidly) write thier own license which has that clause in it as well (eg suns' CDDL license).
The BSD license basically says to your competitors "here's a large dildo that I made, please fuck me with it until my ass is a like unto a gaping vagina the size of a hallway".
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-08 16:11
Ok look Free means different things. For GPL is means liberty and liberty for all. For BSD it means no strings attached liberty for those who can get access to it.
Saying the GPL or BSD is not free is not a really good arguement. You have to be explicit what you mean by freedom.
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-09 12:20
>>40 you have worthless americans who only think about themselves (BSD) and then you have your socialists who care about other people (GPL)
Lol, gb2/lsd
1. I'm not Amerikan
2. Amerikans are famous for commercial software
3. BSD is Amerikan
4. Socialists are faggots who steal your personal work and merits and promote lazyness, among other things. They kinda match the more dictatorial GPL where every other acceptable license must be GPL; however, they don't really fit "free software" licenses; socialists would be more like fagware or corruptionware.
GPL is if you want credit and you want to protect your rights while still giving everyone the same rights and never allowing someone to take those rights away
So, is it really FREE, or not? That's free of charge, but not free.
The BSD license basically says to your competitors "here's a large dildo that I made, please fuck me with it until my ass is a like unto a gaping vagina the size of a hallway".
BSD/MPL licenses are free software. They are about freedom, as in "do whatever you please with our shit, we don't need anything because we really love doing this".
I haven't seen anyone fucking BSD or Mozilla in the ass though. Perhaps they haven't released that part?
By freedom I mean to be able to do as much as possible. Having to release, or not being able to sell, is less free than not having to release and being able to sell, for example.
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-09 17:49
>>44 What Microsoft pulled with the Kerebos authentication suite is a great example of why the BSD license is crap for anything non-trivial. There, they took what is supposed to be an industry standard, and then added a crapload of extentions to it (and broke existing ones) so that it would only interact properly with other MS versions. To top it off, they tried to hide the information on what their modifications were.
All of this was perfectly legal under the BSD license, but had they have gotten away with it, it would have FUCKED a lot of corporate networks. Fortunately they somewhat caved to public pressure and made their modifications viewable.
If an internet protocol is protected using the GNU (or similar -such as the CDDL) license, it's not possible for fucktards to come along and co-op it the way MS tried to co-op the kerebos suite.
And to answer your GPL-isn't-free troll; yes, it is free; you are free to modify it and to resell it. The only thing you ar enot free to do is to deny other people the same rights you enjoy. Saying the GPL isn't free is like saying YOU are not free because you are not allowed to kidnap prisoner and charge a ransom for them.
It's 'free' as in 'free speech', not 'free' as in 'gang rape your neighbors wife, burn down his house and kidnap his goat free'.
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-09 17:50
>>44 What Microsoft pulled with the Kerebos authentication suite is a great example of why the BSD license is crap for anything non-trivial. There, they took what is supposed to be an industry standard, and then added a crapload of extentions to it (and broke existing ones) so that it would only interact properly with other MS versions. To top it off, they tried to hide the information on what their modifications were.
All of this was perfectly legal under the BSD license, but had they have gotten away with it, it would have FUCKED a lot of corporate networks. Fortunately they somewhat caved to public pressure and made their modifications viewable.
If an internet protocol is protected using the GNU (or similar -such as the CDDL) license, it's not possible for fucktards to come along and co-op it the way MS tried to co-op the kerebos suite.
And to answer your GPL-isn't-free troll; yes, it is free; you are free to modify it and to resell it. The only thing you ar enot free to do is to deny other people the same rights you enjoy. Saying the GPL isn't free is like saying YOU are not free because you are not allowed to kidnap someone and charge a ransom for their release.
It's 'free' as in 'free speech', not 'free' as in 'gang rape your neighbors wife, burn down his house and kidnap his goat free'.
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-09 17:50
arrgh, >>45 didn't show up when I did a 'refresh' to see if it posted; sorry about the double-post!
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-09 18:05
>>45
If you don't like what Microsoft did with Kerberos in Windows, why do you use it? You should have been using another implementation.
It's 'free' as in 'free speech', not 'free' as in 'gang rape your neighbors wife, burn down his house and kidnap his goat free'.
I agree that "there ought to be limits to freedom" (who had said this...?), but GPL is too limited, and I'm particularly pissed at the fact they intended on making GPL the only way to be free. If there's only one way to be free, then it's not free.
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-10 2:14
>>48 Was my managers' decision; but *I* got stuck making the shit work (or trying to, I lost that job).
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-10 4:09
What Microsoft pulled with the Kerebos authentication suite is a great example of why the BSD license is crap for anything non-trivial.
If they hadn't used that, they probably would have rolled their own. You'd still be stuck dealing with something incompatible either way.
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-10 6:08
>>44
There's nothing socialist about the GPL dipshit. Don't push your fucked up values onto open sauce.
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-10 6:59
>>51
I think there's nothing as shitty as socialism in GPL too, but I was replying and trolling to >>40 . I'm not the one who started saying open sauce is like communism or socialism, in fact nothing good can be like communism or socialism.
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-10 12:29
open sauce is shit
all it is now is companies exploiting programmers
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-10 12:30
and the programmers are actually happy that they are being exploited
so fucked up
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-10 12:37
If by "companies" you mean "Sun Microsystems" then yeah. Sun sucks.
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-10 13:26
>>55 Because IBM is da r00lz amirite? gb2/b/ child, the adults are trying to talk here.
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-10 16:10
>>56
IBM doesn't come out with shit like "community source - you're free to give us stuff, but don't you dare use our code"
Comments like "the adults are trying to talk here" make you sound really mature and intelligent. No wait.
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-10 16:52
>>57 You're thinking of Microsoft's Shared Source, stop your trolling. The CDDL (the sun license) is actually MORE free than the gpl because you can mix files (CDDL + BSD, or CDDL + Artistic) whereas with the GPL you cannot.
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-10 17:49
>>58
I said community source licence, not common development and distribution licence. Think before you randomly accuse people of trolling... ON 4CHAN :|
You can also mix GPL and BSD (and it becomes GPL), but not the other way around. This annoys bsd devs because the gnu devs steal all the good shit, but the bsd devs can't steal theirs
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-20 9:51
>>61
But that's not specific to BSD vs GPL, you can steal BSD code under any license you please. Indeed, it is that very phenomenon that the GPL exists to combat.
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-21 2:26
UGH SHUT UP GPL IS FREE FOR EVERYONE
BSD IS FREE FOR YOU
DEBATE DONE.
>>63 BSD IS FREE FOR YOU
BSD is free for corporations. GPL is free for people.
Name:
Anonymous2009-01-14 4:47
You don't need an IDE.
Name:
Anonymous2009-03-06 5:42
cares The problems only arise once you know how it works But you can obtain a set of possible original values and outputs the highest Easy in any language that are lamented does that The only thing is nobody uses?