Date: Mon, 29 Jan 1996 15:15:42 -0700 From: Nate Williams <nate@sri.MT.net> To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: compilers Message-ID: <199601292215.PAA09660@rocky.sri.MT.net> In-Reply-To: <199601292122.OAA04545@phaeton.artisoft.com> References: <199601292032.WAA00449@eac.iafrica.com> <199601292122.OAA04545@phaeton.artisoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[ Sexy Integrated Development Environment ] > > The ability to click on a compiler error for a multifile project and have > it pull up an editor with the curs at the offending location in the > correct source file is also nice. You can do this inside of XEmacs now. > The ability to "auto-generate" makefiles with all dependencies is nice. > Many programmers (all right, not me) don't want to know what the Makefile > syntax is; they just want it to work. I used these things in the past, but unfortunately none of the tools I used generated 'Makefiles', but instead Project or some other propriatory files which were only useful on a particular compiler/platform. (It's been awhile since I've used PC tools though..) > The application builder is nice. It would require the adoption of a > standard GUI library to make it work in BSD, but it may be worth it. GUI builders exist for Unix, but again they aren't integrated into the environment. > An IDE means that a programmer doesn't have to know a lot of the details > of the platform before they can start coding and end up with things that > run. This is, I think, an overriding benefit. Not only the platform, you can avoid the idiosyncracies of the tools themselves. However, the *biggest* problem with IDE's is that the 'editor' that drives them is never configurable enough. I always want to be able to use the same macros and setup that I've built up through the years with my editor. :( Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199601292215.PAA09660>