COMPILER

[MOUNTAIN KING]

TRY CODEBLOCKS

Multiple compiler support:

GCC (MingW / Linux GCC)
MSVC++
Digital Mars
Borland C++ 5.5
Open Watcom



The Open Source, Cross-platform,
Free C/C++ IDE

 

[Default User]

TRY CODEBLOCKS

*plonk*



Brian

 

[jacob navia]

TRY CODEBLOCKS

Multiple compiler support:

GCC (MingW / Linux GCC)
MSVC++
Digital Mars
Borland C++ 5.5
Open Watcom



The Open Source, Cross-platform,
Free C/C++ IDE

OK. I downloaded that stuff.
Installed with all default options.
Selected C as default language
Typed a common "hello world" program:
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
long double d = 1e400;

printf("hello %Lg\n",d);
}

Pressed "Build".

Then it tells me
"Error can't find cc1.exe".

Ahhhh. After a lot of searching since this software comes with
ZERO documentation, I found that the installation program installs
the cc1.exe program in
"C:\Program Files (x86)\CodeBlocks\libexec\gcc\mingw32\3.4.4"
but expects the executables in
c:\program files (x86)\codeblocks\bin.

OK, that is just a bug. Copied the files. And then...
Yes! I could see the compiler in action...

"no include path to search for stddef.h"
"no include path to search for stdarg.h"
"error syntax error before size_t".
and hundreds of other errors

When you click in the errors, the IDE will not do anything.
stddef.h is in the codeblocks include path list but it just
doesn't work.

Reflecting on how could I solve that, I noticed a series of
buttons, and without really thing I pressed the one called
"Debug/continue", expecting to test the debugger with an already
compiled program.

But then, codeblocks froze, telling me that it is trying to compile
hello.c and there is no obvious way to understand how to "defreeze"
it.

So I closed the IDE, but when I try to restart it it tells me
"Another program instance is already running. Aborting".

Ahh this means that there is an invisible instance running. I
start the task manager and kill it.

Then, I can start codeblocks again

When codeblocks starts, it puts a semi transparent logo. I am
impressed by how well it looks. This makes me forget all other small
problems I have seen. How much time they spent studying the
logo, it looks perfect.

Of coourse it will not compile this second time, so I try to use
something from this pile of code. I chose "Export to html" and
load the generated html file into the browser.

It looks perfect except that the last brace is missing... The last
line is not displayed.

Well, codeblocks is a nice program.
I tried it 1 year ago and I had the same problems. Maybe somebody
of the developers list reads this. It would be nice too, if they would
write some documentation... I mean is the first IDE I see that for
documentation has "Tips for usage". Probably you have to read all the
"tips" before you can use it.

jacob

 

[santosh]

OK. I downloaded that stuff.

<long winded bemoan snipped>

Why don't you post this to the Code::Blocks
forum/mailing-list/group/whatever than in here? What has Code::Blocks to do
with this group?

<OT>
I tried Code::Blocks briefly a year back, when I still had a copy of
Windows, and it worked fine. IIRC, an existing installation of gcc (MinGW)
must be present, since Code::Blocks itself is merely an IDE.
</OT>

 

[jacob navia]

Why don't you post this to the Code::Blocks
forum/mailing-list/group/whatever than in here? What has Code::Blocks to do
with this group?

Well, it was a C IDE and C IDEs are on topic...
(Tools)

<OT>
I tried Code::Blocks briefly a year back, when I still had a copy of
Windows, and it worked fine. IIRC, an existing installation of gcc (MinGW)
must be present, since Code::Blocks itself is merely an IDE.
</OT>

No. I selected "CodeBlocks + Mingw compiler",
and the compiler was installed by the installation program.

 

[Richard Heathfield]

[Attrib restored]

jacob navia said:

santosh said:

Well, it was a C IDE and C IDEs are on topic...
(Tools)

Actually, it's C that's on topic, not C IDEs. If you are arguing that C
tools are topical, then that would mean that all of the following are
topical:

ar bash ctags doxygen emacs find gcc hexdump indent joe knode lex mysql
nm objdump pico qlib rgbmap sed tar ulimit vim wc xterm yacc zip

since all of them are tools which can be used when writing C programs.
So are thousands, or even millions, of other tools. Lest I be accused
of bias, here are some Windows tools I've used for helping me write C
programs: Notepad, edit, ed, Brief, gvim, MultiEdit, Visual Studio, C++
Builder (yes, you can use it for C too), telnet, Rumba...

....well, that list is endless too, but I'm sure you get the idea. If
discussion of such tools were topical, the group would quickly descend
into a maelstrom of posts that had little or nothing to do with the
language itself.

The topic in comp.lang.c is the comp-uter lang-uage called C. It's very
simple.

 

[Richard]

<long winded bemoan snipped>

Why don't you post this to the Code::Blocks
forum/mailing-list/group/whatever than in here? What has Code::Blocks to do
with this group?

<OT>
I tried Code::Blocks briefly a year back, when I still had a copy of
Windows, and it worked fine. IIRC, an existing installation of gcc (MinGW)
must be present, since Code::Blocks itself is merely an IDE.
</OT>

More worryingly is that support for the biggest "new kid on the block"
is either outdated or non existent (Ubuntu packages).

I wouldn't recommend it to a C nOOb on a Linux platform.

 

[Richard]

*plonk*



Brian

It that on topic? Does anyone really care who YOU *plonk*?

No.

 

[osmium]

:

<long winded bemoan snipped>

Why don't you post this to the Code::Blocks
forum/mailing-list/group/whatever than in here? What has Code::Blocks to
do
with this group?

What you call a long winded bemoan, I would call a brief, useful, review.
Do you really expect us to find Code Blocks support, register, get our
address on yet another list we don't want to be on, learn the protocol and
wade through what was already there? Let me draw your attention to a book
that is going through a very lengthy review in another thread on this
newsgroup. That too, is a tool of sorts thought to be of interest to C
programmers.

Thanks, Jacob.

 

[Richard]

:



What you call a long winded bemoan, I would call a brief, useful, review.
Do you really expect us to find Code Blocks support, register, get our
address on yet another list we don't want to be on, learn the protocol and
wade through what was already there? Let me draw your attention to a book
that is going through a very lengthy review in another thread on this
newsgroup. That too, is a tool of sorts thought to be of interest to C
programmers.

But of course that's not OT because the core element here are enjoying
savaging it.

Thanks, Jacob.

--

 

[santosh]

More worryingly is that support for the biggest "new kid on the block"
is either outdated or non existent (Ubuntu packages).

I wouldn't recommend it to a C nOOb on a Linux platform.

Yes, I had to hand compile several support libraries before I could even get
it to start.

 

[Kenny McCormack]

wade through what was already there? Let me draw your attention to a book
that is going through a very lengthy review in another thread on this
newsgroup. That too, is a tool of sorts thought to be of interest to C
programmers.

But of course that's not OT because the core element here are enjoying
savaging it.[/QUOTE]

Funny how that works, innit?

P.S. What's really funny is how the core elements worked up this psuedo
with the handle "santosh", to further their whacko position. Think
carefully about how useful it is to have a "core element" poster with a
decidely, shall we say, ethnic sounding name.

 

[santosh]

:



What you call a long winded bemoan, I would call a brief, useful, review.
Do you really expect us to find Code Blocks support, register, get our
address on yet another list we don't want to be on, learn the protocol and
wade through what was already there?

But, Jacob's bug report will be of use to the code::blocks developers, while
it's largely going to be ignored. FWIW, I experienced similar problems
myself under Windows, and to get it to start, I had hand compile several
libraries under Linux.

But what's the point of exchanging such messages here?

Let me draw your attention to a book
that is going through a very lengthy review in another thread on this
newsgroup. That too, is a tool of sorts thought to be of interest to C
programmers.

Most of the "issues" that were pointed in Malcolm's book were involving C
code.

 

[Richard]

wade through what was already there? Let me draw your attention to a book
that is going through a very lengthy review in another thread on this
newsgroup. That too, is a tool of sorts thought to be of interest to C
programmers.

But of course that's not OT because the core element here are enjoying
savaging it.

Funny how that works, innit?

P.S. What's really funny is how the core elements worked up this psuedo
with the handle "santosh", to further their whacko position. Think
carefully about how useful it is to have a "core element" poster with a
decidely, shall we say, ethnic sounding name.[/QUOTE]

I think that might be carrying it a bit too far :-;

 

[osmium]

:

But what's the point of exchanging such messages here?

Apparently you only saw bits and pieces of my post. The point is this:

"Do you really expect us to find Code Blocks support,
register, get our address on yet another list we don't
want to be on, learn the protocol and wade through
what was already there? "

Someone proposed Code Blocks as being a useful thing. Jacob refuted that,
and I thought rather effectively. It was not simply an assertion "this is
junk". He told us *why* it was no good. I don't have all day to spend on
this stuff and he saved us, collectively, a lot of time.

Can't you see that?

If he wants to also post his findings somewhere else where the Code Blocks
people, if there indeed are such people could see it, that would be nice
too.

 

[santosh]

:



Apparently you only saw bits and pieces of my post. The point is this:

"Do you really expect us to find Code Blocks support,
register, get our address on yet another list we don't
want to be on, learn the protocol and wade through
what was already there? "

Not necessary. Just download a version and try it out. If there remain
problems or issues for clarification, and you're insistent on continuing to
use the IDE, then, IMHO, a dedicated forum would be the best place to go
to.

Someone proposed Code Blocks as being a useful thing. Jacob refuted that,
and I thought rather effectively. It was not simply an assertion "this is
junk". He told us *why* it was no good.

He told us that in his experience, it did not work properly. BTW, it was
working fine for me about two years ago on Windows. Later versions started
having problems, while the current one wont even startup on Linux without
serious effort.

The point is, the best way is to try and see. Also I agree that Jacob's
review in itself is useful, just that it's the wrong group to post it in.

I don't have all day to spend on
this stuff and he saved us, collectively, a lot of time.

Can't you see that?

Yea, I can see your point.

 

[jacob navia]

Not necessary. Just download a version and try it out. If there remain
problems or issues for clarification, and you're insistent on continuing to
use the IDE, then, IMHO, a dedicated forum would be the best place to go
to.


He told us that in his experience, it did not work properly. BTW, it was
working fine for me about two years ago on Windows. Later versions started
having problems, while the current one wont even startup on Linux without
serious effort.

The point is, the best way is to try and see. Also I agree that Jacob's
review in itself is useful, just that it's the wrong group to post it in.


Yea, I can see your point.

That's all I wanted to do.

Very often we see here:

"C programmer's site http://www bla bla"

And some people make the effort of reviewing that site to tell the
others if it is worth to go there. This is basically the same.

jacob

 

[Richard Heathfield]

santosh said:

Also I agree that
Jacob's review in itself is useful, just that it's the wrong group to
post it in.

That's hardly Mr Navia's fault, since he did not choose the group. Some
bozo called MOUNTAIN KING did that. All Mr Navia did was debunk the
product being spammed to the group; such debunking is a perfectly
reasonable thing to do.

 

[santosh]

wade through what was already there? Let me draw your attention to a
book that is going through a very lengthy review in another thread on
this
newsgroup. That too, is a tool of sorts thought to be of interest to C
programmers.

But of course that's not OT because the core element here are enjoying
savaging it.

Funny how that works, innit?

P.S. What's really funny is how the core elements worked up this psuedo
with the handle "santosh", to further their whacko position.[/QUOTE]

I take responsibility for what I post. I have not got "worked up" by "the
core elements", whatever that means.

Think
carefully about how useful it is to have a "core element" poster with a
decidely, shall we say, ethnic sounding name.

There is no "core element" in this group. Different people post according to
their independent judgements. Sometimes, it happens that one or more
posters agree.

BTW, what's ethnicity got to do with posting to this group?

PS. If you feel strongly that there should be no effort to maintain
topicality, why don't you provide useful responses to the OT questions we
keep getting? OTOH, typically, your stock response is the least useful and
most acerbic, directing the poor OP to a Wikipaedia page on Aspergers
syndrome and similar nonsense. At least the rest of us provide useful
redirections.

 

[Richard]

santosh said:



That's hardly Mr Navia's fault, since he did not choose the group. Some
bozo called MOUNTAIN KING did that. All Mr Navia did was debunk the
product being spammed to the group; such debunking is a perfectly
reasonable thing to do.

How can debunking be ok but singing the praises not be? Are you always
so mindlessly destructive in your thinking and judgements?

--