reborn ?

Discussion in 'C Programming' started by Osiris, May 15, 2007.

  1. Osiris

    Osiris Guest

    I will be programming in C again, after being absent for some 5 years
    from the C-world.
    What are the popular programming environments these days ?
    windows has Miicrosofts IDE, I know, and Borland IDE's
    What about Linux ?
    GNU, of course.
    Eclipse ?
    not EMACS huh ? please... or VIM....can't be....
    Osiris, May 15, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Osiris said:

    > I will be programming in C again, after being absent for some 5 years
    > from the C-world.
    > What are the popular programming environments these days ?


    Computers are favourite, although by no means mandatory.

    > windows has Miicrosofts IDE, I know, and Borland IDE's
    > What about Linux ?


    Linux /is/ an IDE.

    > GNU, of course.
    > Eclipse ?
    > not EMACS huh ? please... or VIM....can't be....


    The Linux IDE comes complete with a multitude of tool choices for
    specific tasks, and you can mix and match them according to your own
    personal taste. Personally, for editing I use vim, even though EMACS
    probably carries more kudos among the cognoscenti, for the simple
    reason that vim can be used, in a pinch, with only one hand (leaving
    the other free to hold a coffee mug), whereas EMACS needs at least
    three.

    --
    Richard Heathfield
    "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
    http://www.cpax.org.uk
    email: rjh at the above domain, - www.
    Richard Heathfield, May 16, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Osiris

    Cawas Guest

    On May 15, 7:53 pm, Osiris <> wrote:
    > I will be programming in C again, after being absent for some 5 years
    > from the C-world.
    > What are the popular programming environments these days ?
    > windows has Miicrosofts IDE, I know, and Borland IDE's
    > What about Linux ?
    > GNU, of course.
    > Eclipse ?
    > not EMACS huh ? please... or VIM....can't be....


    Well, I think I won't be adding much, but who knows... I usually
    program in windows, using either of these:
    Crimson Editor
    DevCPP
    JEdit
    Arachnophilia

    And as far as I knew, Eclipse was for Java. But don't worry explaining
    this to me, as I'll google for it soon enough.
    Cawas, May 16, 2007
    #3
  4. Osiris

    Al Balmer Guest

    On Wed, 16 May 2007 00:53:52 +0200, Osiris <> wrote:

    >I will be programming in C again, after being absent for some 5 years
    >from the C-world.
    >What are the popular programming environments these days ?
    >windows has Miicrosofts IDE, I know, and Borland IDE's
    >What about Linux ?
    >GNU, of course.
    >Eclipse ?
    >not EMACS huh ? please... or VIM....can't be....


    [OT]The GNU (gcc) toolchain is probably the most popular for Linux.
    Eclipse was originally for Java, but has C and C++ plugins now. There
    are many editors available, both commercial (I use Slickedit) and
    free, and many of them can be used as IDEs.

    --
    Al Balmer
    Sun City, AZ
    Al Balmer, May 16, 2007
    #4
  5. Osiris

    jaysome Guest

    On Wed, 16 May 2007 13:12:48 +0000, Richard Heathfield
    <> wrote:

    >Osiris said:
    >
    >> I will be programming in C again, after being absent for some 5 years
    >> from the C-world.
    >> What are the popular programming environments these days ?

    >
    >Computers are favourite, although by no means mandatory.
    >
    >> windows has Miicrosofts IDE, I know, and Borland IDE's
    >> What about Linux ?

    >
    >Linux /is/ an IDE.


    Huh?

    IDE stands for Integrated Development Environment. Note what the "I"
    in IDE stands for.

    An IDE implies an editor, a compiler, a linker and a debugger, all
    wrapped into a single application. Visual Studio running on Windows
    (or under Wine in Linux) satisfies this requirement. What application
    in Linux satisfies this requirement (not VIM, but maybe Eclipse, which
    is arguably not Linux)?

    >
    >> GNU, of course.
    >> Eclipse ?
    >> not EMACS huh ? please... or VIM....can't be....

    >
    >The Linux IDE comes complete with a multitude of tool choices for
    >specific tasks, and you can mix and match them according to your own
    >personal taste. Personally, for editing I use vim, even though EMACS
    >probably carries more kudos among the cognoscenti, for the simple
    >reason that vim can be used, in a pinch, with only one hand (leaving
    >the other free to hold a coffee mug), whereas EMACS needs at least
    >three.


    VIM is an editor, but hardly an IDE. I bet you edit your code in VIM,
    compile and link it in a terminal window with gcc, and then run it in
    a shell. That's two or three segregated applications, sans addressing
    the issue of debugging. Run gdb and you have a true SDE (Segregated
    Development Environment) consisting of at least four different
    applications, and five or more if you include the shell and any GUI
    wrappers that run on top of that.

    Are three hands really necessary to use a true IDE on Linux?

    FWIW, I can use a true IDE on Windows with one hand, leaving my other
    hand free to hold my coffee mug.

    --
    jay
    jaysome, May 17, 2007
    #5
  6. Osiris

    Chris Dollin Guest

    jaysome wrote:

    > On Wed, 16 May 2007 13:12:48 +0000, Richard Heathfield
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>Osiris said:
    >>
    >>> I will be programming in C again, after being absent for some 5 years
    >>> from the C-world.
    >>> What are the popular programming environments these days ?

    >>
    >>Computers are favourite, although by no means mandatory.
    >>
    >>> windows has Miicrosofts IDE, I know, and Borland IDE's
    >>> What about Linux ?

    >>
    >>Linux /is/ an IDE.

    >
    > Huh?
    >
    > IDE stands for Integrated Development Environment. Note what the "I"
    > in IDE stands for.
    >
    > An IDE implies an editor, a compiler, a linker and a debugger, all
    > wrapped into a single application.


    Yes, that's right. Linux. Editors, compilers, linkers, and debuggers,
    all in one handy package.

    Here's /my/ definition of an IDE: it should supply refactoring and
    unit-testing tools [1]. The rest is mere frippery ...

    [1] That make their use routine.

    --
    Deadpan Hedgehog
    "Who do you serve, and who do you trust?" /Crusade/
    Chris Dollin, May 17, 2007
    #6
  7. jaysome said:

    > On Wed, 16 May 2007 13:12:48 +0000, Richard Heathfield
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>Osiris said:
    >>
    >>> windows has Miicrosofts IDE, I know, and Borland IDE's
    >>> What about Linux ?

    >>
    >>Linux /is/ an IDE.

    >
    > Huh?
    >
    > IDE stands for Integrated Development Environment.


    Yes, the term is around 20 years old. I have come across it before.

    > Note what the "I" in IDE stands for.


    Indeed.

    > An IDE implies an editor, a compiler, a linker and a debugger, all
    > wrapped into a single application.


    Yes. Linux is therefore an IDE. It includes not just one editor but
    many, a compiler, a linker, a debugger, and a whole host of filters and
    graphic editors and ancillary programs such as email clients,
    newsreaders, word processors, spreadsheets, Web servers and so on. All
    out of the box and ready to go.

    > Visual Studio running on Windows
    > (or under Wine in Linux) satisfies this requirement. What application
    > in Linux satisfies this requirement


    Linux. I already said.

    --
    Richard Heathfield
    "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
    http://www.cpax.org.uk
    email: rjh at the above domain, - www.
    Richard Heathfield, May 17, 2007
    #7
  8. In article <>,
    jaysome <> wrote:
    >On Wed, 16 May 2007 13:12:48 +0000, Richard Heathfield
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >>Osiris said:
    >>
    >>> I will be programming in C again, after being absent for some 5 years
    >>> from the C-world.
    >>> What are the popular programming environments these days ?

    >>
    >>Computers are favourite, although by no means mandatory.
    >>
    >>> windows has Miicrosofts IDE, I know, and Borland IDE's
    >>> What about Linux ?

    >>
    >>Linux /is/ an IDE.

    >
    >Huh?
    >
    >IDE stands for Integrated Development Environment. Note what the "I"
    >in IDE stands for.
    >
    >An IDE implies an editor, a compiler, a linker and a debugger, all
    >wrapped into a single application. Visual Studio running on Windows
    >(or under Wine in Linux) satisfies this requirement. What application
    >in Linux satisfies this requirement (not VIM, but maybe Eclipse, which
    >is arguably not Linux)?


    Whoosh!!!
    Kenny McCormack, May 17, 2007
    #8
  9. Richard Heathfield <> wrote:

    > Yes. Linux is therefore an IDE. It includes not just one editor but
    > many, a compiler, a linker, a debugger, and a whole host of filters and
    > graphic editors and ancillary programs such as email clients,
    > newsreaders, word processors, spreadsheets, Web servers and so on. All
    > out of the box and ready to go.


    I think the point is that these applications are not "integrated" out
    of the box. Linux is more of an IDE framework than an IDE itself; it
    provides all the components a developer could ever wish for, but the
    task of "integrating" them is left to the developer.

    --
    C. Benson Manica | I *should* know what I'm talking about - if I
    cbmanica(at)gmail.com | don't, I need to know. Flames welcome.
    Christopher Benson-Manica, May 17, 2007
    #9
  10. Christopher Benson-Manica said:

    > Richard Heathfield <> wrote:
    >
    >> Yes. Linux is therefore an IDE. It includes not just one editor but
    >> many, a compiler, a linker, a debugger, and a whole host of filters
    >> and graphic editors and ancillary programs such as email clients,
    >> newsreaders, word processors, spreadsheets, Web servers and so on.
    >> All out of the box and ready to go.

    >
    > I think the point is that these applications are not "integrated" out
    > of the box.


    On a single screen, I have an editor window, a debugger window, a
    compilation window, a 'run' window, and several 'whatever the heck I
    like' windows. I can copy information between any of them quickly and
    easily. I can switch between them quickly and easily. And I can call up
    additional windows for any purpose at the drop of a key, and they will
    seamlessly gain this ability to yield and receive information from
    other windows as I direct.

    What is it, precisely, about this setup that you think is not
    "integrated"?

    --
    Richard Heathfield
    "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
    http://www.cpax.org.uk
    email: rjh at the above domain, - www.
    Richard Heathfield, May 17, 2007
    #10
  11. Osiris

    Tor Rustad Guest

    Osiris wrote:
    > I will be programming in C again, after being absent for some 5 years
    > from the C-world.


    Welcome back

    > not EMACS huh ? please...


    What is wrong with emacs? I use emacs, these days you can even use the
    mouse and have syntax coloring!


    I have tried out an IDE like KDevelop, but hesitate to use it. Too many
    files are generated, for my taste. When you know how to write your own
    makefile, that is really annoying.

    BTW, I still use command line gdb...! :)


    --
    Tor
    Tor Rustad, May 17, 2007
    #11
  12. Osiris

    osmium Guest

    "Richard Heathfield" writes:

    >>> Yes. Linux is therefore an IDE. It includes not just one editor but
    >>> many, a compiler, a linker, a debugger, and a whole host of filters
    >>> and graphic editors and ancillary programs such as email clients,
    >>> newsreaders, word processors, spreadsheets, Web servers and so on.
    >>> All out of the box and ready to go.

    >>
    >> I think the point is that these applications are not "integrated" out
    >> of the box.

    >
    > On a single screen, I have an editor window, a debugger window, a
    > compilation window, a 'run' window, and several 'whatever the heck I
    > like' windows. I can copy information between any of them quickly and
    > easily. I can switch between them quickly and easily. And I can call up
    > additional windows for any purpose at the drop of a key, and they will
    > seamlessly gain this ability to yield and receive information from
    > other windows as I direct.
    >
    > What is it, precisely, about this setup that you think is not
    > "integrated"?


    Which variant of Linux do you have that you are so in love with? Is it as
    good as an Atari ST with Hot Wire! and the Tempest editor? That is, by far,
    the best thing I ever saw. I hope I got those names right, it has been a
    while. As I recall I could press numeric keypad 1 through 4 in Tempest and
    get four differnent text screens displayed as fast as I could press the
    keys.

    WRT, the question you ask, it seems to me that the integration is going on
    in your mind, rather than in a computer program. Not that there is anything
    wrong with that.
    osmium, May 17, 2007
    #12
  13. osmium said:

    > "Richard Heathfield" writes:
    >
    >> On a single screen, I have an editor window, a debugger window, a
    >> compilation window, a 'run' window, and several 'whatever the heck I
    >> like' windows. I can copy information between any of them quickly and
    >> easily. I can switch between them quickly and easily. And I can call
    >> up additional windows for any purpose at the drop of a key, and they
    >> will seamlessly gain this ability to yield and receive information
    >> from other windows as I direct.
    >>
    >> What is it, precisely, about this setup that you think is not
    >> "integrated"?

    >
    > Which variant of Linux do you have that you are so in love with?


    It happens to be SuSE, but hey, any Linux will do.

    > WRT, the question you ask, it seems to me that the integration is
    > going on in your mind, rather than in a computer program.


    That's an interesting take on it. :) But of course Linux does make it
    very easy to "think integrated", since everything works on the same
    basic premise as everything else.

    > Not that there is anything wrong with that.


    Indeed. Nevertheless, I'm curious to hear Chris's response.

    --
    Richard Heathfield
    "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
    http://www.cpax.org.uk
    email: rjh at the above domain, - www.
    Richard Heathfield, May 17, 2007
    #13
  14. Richard Heathfield <> wrote:

    > On a single screen, I have an editor window, a debugger window, a
    > compilation window, a 'run' window, and several 'whatever the heck I
    > like' windows. I can copy information between any of them quickly and
    > easily. I can switch between them quickly and easily. And I can call up
    > additional windows for any purpose at the drop of a key, and they will
    > seamlessly gain this ability to yield and receive information from
    > other windows as I direct.


    > What is it, precisely, about this setup that you think is not
    > "integrated"?


    <ot>

    I do agree with osmium's assessment :) Seriously, it seems
    reasonable to define an IDE as something more than a loose collection
    of components whose relationships and interactions are managed by a
    programmer, which is the situation that you've described; to me the
    fundamental principle is encapsulation. You can take a golf cart
    and bolt on an alternator to run an air conditioner and a portable CD
    player, and buy a trailer to haul things with, but it won't be a
    pickup truck.

    </ot>

    --
    C. Benson Manica | I *should* know what I'm talking about - if I
    cbmanica(at)gmail.com | don't, I need to know. Flames welcome.
    Christopher Benson-Manica, May 17, 2007
    #14
  15. Osiris

    Osiris Guest

    On Wed, 16 May 2007 00:53:52 +0200, Osiris <> wrote:

    >I will be programming in C again, after being absent for some 5 years
    >from the C-world.
    >What are the popular programming environments these days ?
    >windows has Miicrosofts IDE, I know, and Borland IDE's
    >What about Linux ?
    >GNU, of course.
    >Eclipse ?
    >not EMACS huh ? please... or VIM....can't be....


    thanks all.
    I see it is still difficult to stay away from the, somewhat, religious
    wars on tools. Feels like home again... ;-)
    I had a good look at emacs back then and found it difficult and
    counter intuitive. VIM.... too much to remember, not intuitive either,
    I found... archaic.
    On windoze I use UEDit, with nice syntacs coloring and I don't need to
    use all the frills. Almost like notepad ;-)
    Hey, I keep my source files short, I don't need slick navigation
    stuff.. I just scroll...

    And yeah, I know about makefiles.

    I'm looking to arrange for myself a lean and mean development
    environment.
    Osiris, May 17, 2007
    #15
  16. On Thu, 17 May 2007 10:48:29 +0000, in comp.lang.c , Richard
    Heathfield <> wrote:

    >jaysome said:
    >
    >> An IDE implies an editor, a compiler, a linker and a debugger, all
    >> wrapped into a single application.

    >
    >Yes. Linux is therefore an IDE. It includes not just one editor but
    >many,


    While I appreciate the joke*, its obviously not what most people mean
    by an IDE. While I can indeed compile, link and debug code on Linux
    its somewhat lacking on the I part of the IDE.

    *and if you're not joking, please take the "I'm a zealot and I'll burn
    anyone who says otherwise" badge as you leave the church.
    --
    Mark McIntyre

    "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
    Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
    by definition, not smart enough to debug it."
    --Brian Kernighan
    Mark McIntyre, May 17, 2007
    #16
  17. On Thu, 17 May 2007 16:14:01 +0000, in comp.lang.c , Richard
    Heathfield <> wrote:

    >On a single screen, I have an editor window, a debugger window, a
    >compilation window, a 'run' window, and several 'whatever the heck I
    >like' windows. I can copy information between any of them quickly and
    >easily. I can switch between them quickly and easily. And I can call up
    >additional windows for any purpose at the drop of a key, and they will
    >seamlessly gain this ability to yield and receive information from
    >other windows as I direct.
    >
    >What is it, precisely, about this setup that you think is not
    >"integrated"?


    Now you're just being silly.

    A typical IDE will provide a means to
    - compile code directly from the editor
    - step through running code in the editor
    - automatically create build scripts
    - automatically link in resources you need
    - provide a means to edit non-text resources from withing the editor
    etc etc, all without having to write special macros or whatever.

    But you know all this. You're just being silly.

    --
    Mark McIntyre

    "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
    Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
    by definition, not smart enough to debug it."
    --Brian Kernighan
    Mark McIntyre, May 17, 2007
    #17
  18. In article <>,
    Mark McIntyre <> wrote:

    >A typical IDE will provide a means to
    >- compile code directly from the editor
    >- step through running code in the editor


    Emacs provides these.

    -- Richard
    --
    "Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters
    in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963.
    Richard Tobin, May 17, 2007
    #18
  19. On Thu, 17 May 2007 17:25:57 +0000, in comp.lang.c , Richard
    Heathfield <> wrote:

    >But of course Linux does make it
    >very easy to "think integrated", since everything works on the same
    >basic premise as everything else.


    I hate zealotry about Operating Systems, so I;ll rise to that.

    The above remark is either nonsense (since when did vi operate on the
    same basic premise as xvnc, or snort on the same basic premise as
    glade ?) or a truism (notepad operates on the same basic premise as
    starry night pro, to choose two random windows apps on my desktop),
    and hence meaningless.

    Don't get me wrong - I spend an inordinate amount of time using Linux
    (heck ,it runs my mail, file, print, web, and security services) but
    I'm not about to start making ludicrous claims about it. Its an OS,
    not a religion.


    ..
    --
    Mark McIntyre

    "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
    Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
    by definition, not smart enough to debug it."
    --Brian Kernighan
    Mark McIntyre, May 17, 2007
    #19
  20. Mark McIntyre said:

    > On Thu, 17 May 2007 10:48:29 +0000, in comp.lang.c , Richard
    > Heathfield <> wrote:
    >
    >>jaysome said:
    >>
    >>> An IDE implies an editor, a compiler, a linker and a debugger, all
    >>> wrapped into a single application.

    >>
    >>Yes. Linux is therefore an IDE. It includes not just one editor but
    >>many,

    >
    > While I appreciate the joke*, its obviously not what most people mean
    > by an IDE. While I can indeed compile, link and debug code on Linux
    > its somewhat lacking on the I part of the IDE.


    Then please explain what /you/ mean by "integrated".

    > *and if you're not joking, please take the "I'm a zealot and I'll burn
    > anyone who says otherwise" badge as you leave the church.


    I'm not joking, but I'm not interested in burning anyone either. If you
    want to discuss IDEs, fine, but please do so without being ridiculous
    about it. You just emerged from a 30-day spell in my bozo bin. I don't
    particularly want to punt you back in there, but I will if I have to.

    --
    Richard Heathfield
    "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
    http://www.cpax.org.uk
    email: rjh at the above domain, - www.
    Richard Heathfield, May 17, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jukka K. Korpela

    The multicol tag reborn

    Jukka K. Korpela, Feb 28, 2012, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    1,078
    dorayme
    Mar 6, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page