Makefiles, and IDEs in general.

For quite a while, my only experience with C and C++ was through the Bloodshead dev C++ IDE. It's a nice little program, but it's not going to be updated any time soon, so I went looking for a new IDE.

Now, most IDEs these days need you to download and install the compiler separately. Why, I don't know. Dev C++ never had to do this, and it still worked fine. Even after faffing around with that, these compilers go on about needing some kind of 'makefile' when trying to compile a windows program, which leaves me clueless, as Dev C++ happily compiled anything I threw at it while quite ignorant of the things. I've no idea what I'm supposed to do to make this 'makefile' appear so some instruction as to what they are would be helpful. I'm trying to compile with the NetBeans and Eclipse IDE, if such information is necessary.

Also, another thing I've noticed about IDEs lately is they you can't make single files. Dev C++ quite happily let me make a quick .c file and compile it to test a piece of code, but in every other IDE you need to make a great huge project and put the file in that. Nothing major, just a little annoyance for me.

msg@>>1 why are you switching if its good enough?

This is the big mess about ides. Also I heard that devc++ is good for code writing but sucks for organization.

I prefer doing it manually and using makefiles

why would anyone need anything beyond VI is beyond me

EMACS. I use EMACS. I've been using EMACS for two years and I don't complain.

if emacs is your OS then UNIX is your device drive amirite?

>>5
I actually agree with you on this point, Emacs' C facilities are rather good and I no longer do any of my C coding in anything else.

When I use an editor, I don't want eight extra KILOBYTES of worthless help screens and cursor positioning code! I just want an EDitor!!
Not a "viitor". Not a "emacsitor". Those aren't even WORDS!!!!
ED! ED! ED IS THE STANDARD!!!

>>8
away with thee
back under yonder bridge
thou troll most foul

I have never needed to create a makefile when using an IDE. But then, I haven't used an IDE in years, and I only used MSVS and Eclipse. Is this a troll post or are there seriously IDEs that don't generate their own makefiles? Not that creating a makefile is a big deal, but I thought this was a "feature" of IDEs, so that people who don't know how compilers work could still write code. (And then code completion, so that people who don't even understand their own code can write code.)

>>9
That's not a troll.

Also, Sam is the new standard.

i'm going to write a script that hides every post without BBcode

>>1

OP, you've just outlined all the same reasons why I *hate* IDEs with a burning passion. Especially Eclipse. You can't do shit unless you create a workspace, and project, and jump through all sorts of crazy fucking hoops.

This is why to this day, for personal projects I still code in kwrite or gvim and compile and debug from command line.

>>1,13
Sounds like you guys need TextMate.

>>14
No.

OP, you've just outlined all the same reasons why I *hate* Lisp-2s with a burning passion. Especially Common Lisp. You can't do shit unless you create a namespace, and funcall everything, and jump through all sorts of crazy fucking hoops.

This is why to this day, for personal projects I still code in scheme or ocaml and compile and debug from command line.

>>13
Those "crazy steps" take less time to do than it takes eclipse to start up.  Not to mention they generate a skeleton for you thus saving you the time of retyping that boilerplate.  Also even if the creating a project was a net loss in time which it isn't(and really its not like you don't end up doing the same thing when you write a makefile).  The efficiency gained by using the features of a good IDE far outweigh the benefits of using a lightweight editor.  The only reason you hate IDE's with a burning passion is because they have to be learned, just like vim has to be learned, and you have not learned how to use IDE's beyond the basics.  Obviously if someone only learned how to move the cursor around and insert text with vim they would proclaim notepad the superior editor, just because if all you want to do is a move the cursor around a file an insert text, notepad really is the superior editor.  In the same token if you really don't want to use the features of an IDE, then vim is the superior environment.

In any case it should be obvious that no real effort is made in IDE's to cater to toy programs.  Toy programs are just that, toys.  It doesn't really matter where or how you program them because most people will forget about them a few hours after they type them out.  IDE developers but most of their efforts into automating the coding process as much as possible.  This really helps large projects where the coding process takes increasingly more time than the coding itself.

>>14
TextMate is just Notepad with syntax highlighting. It's the worst text editor I've ever criticized based solely on what you see of it in screenshots, which is the most accurate way to assess a text editor's feature set.

>>1
Use code blocks.  It's basically bloodshed but better.  You download it with a compiler.

>>18
Maybe you should have watched the screencast.

>>20
I have a fetish for /prog/lodytes who can't tell when THBT. Bend over, >>20-chan

>>21
YHBMT?

>>16
Enjoy reinventing the wheel （　≖‿≖）

>>1 as >>19 says, code::blocks is a nice replacement for dev, and you dont need to create a project or anything to compile.

use notepad++

You don't have to make a project in Dev-Cpp if you use

#pragma comment(lib, "somelib.lib")

actually I'm not sure if there's any other features that would require you to make a project, but linking is the most common one