DevC++ or Mingw newsgroup?

[Jim Langston]

Does anyone know of a newsgroup appropriate for discussing DevC++? I
looked for a Dev C++ newsgroup and mingw newsgroup but couldn't find one.

 

[Krice]

Does anyone know of a newsgroup appropriate for discussing DevC++?

There is an official forum, but let's just say that DevC++ has
not been developed in years. I don't know what is going on, but
I guess it's a typical almost abandoned open source project.
Also I had the feeling that authors really don't want to listen
what users have to say about DevC++. Again, it's accepted
behaviour because open source, but doesn't really help DevC++
become a better developer tool.

 

[Jim Langston]

There is an official forum, but let's just say that DevC++ has
not been developed in years. I don't know what is going on, but
I guess it's a typical almost abandoned open source project.
Also I had the feeling that authors really don't want to listen
what users have to say about DevC++. Again, it's accepted
behaviour because open source, but doesn't really help DevC++
become a better developer tool.

Well, the official forum link on the DevC++ web page links to a URL that
redirects back to the DevC++ webpage. In other words, the offical forum is
gone.

I guess I'll just go ahead and work with MSVC++ 2005 Express. Dang.

 

[Krice]

In other words, the offical forum is gone.

Nope, it's still there.
http://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?forum_id=48211

I guess I'll just go ahead and work with MSVC++ 2005 Express.

Nothing wrong with that VC++ is the best IDE I know.

 

[Nick Keighley]

I guess I'll just go ahead and work with MSVC++ 2005 Express.  Dang.

consider MSVC++ 2008 Express. It installs the platform SDK
which you nedd for windows development.

 

[Krice]

That, I think, is the most common complaint
about modern versions of MS tools; it's not that they won't
compile most any standard code, it's that the included bells
and whistles tend to generate highly non-portable,
Windows-specific code.

I'm generating my own source code the old fashion way: by
writing it VC++ doesn't generate anything unless you want.
It has some bad habits like it doesn't require to #include
standard (CRT) headers to use their functions which I find
pretty odd and it's suggesting to use _s (secure) versions
of sprintf, strcpy, etc. So I guess it's more the programmers
decision how portable code he wants to write. Also I don't
like the way compiled executables require .NET even
if you write plain C++, but you can fix that with
DevC++ which produces M$ free executables.

 

[Erik Wikström]

Also I don't like the way compiled executables require .NET even if
you write plain C++, but you can fix that with DevC++ which produces
M$ free executables.

Or just configuring the compiler correctly, if your binaries requires
..NET you have done something wrong.

 

[Nick Keighley]

I'm generating my own source code the old fashion way: by
writing it VC++ doesn't generate anything unless you want.
It has some bad habits like it doesn't require to #include
standard (CRT) headers to use their functions which I find
pretty odd and it's suggesting to use _s (secure) versions
of sprintf, strcpy, etc.

you can suppress that warning.

So I guess it's more the programmers
decision how portable code he wants to write.

<snip>