Developer forums (C::B DEVELOPMENT STRICTLY!) > Development
Build CodeBlocks using Microsoft Visual C++
MortenMacFly:
--- Quote from: Biplab on April 06, 2011, 05:53:04 pm ---They add bloat to the source; not to the binary. And with the code-folding feature in any modern IDE/Editor, it is not an issue anymore that source code will become unreadable. :)
--- End quote ---
I clearly disagree here. We are working 100% with the code, so cluttered code is bad. And we cannot selectively code-fold, just "all-or-nothing" as you know. In addition Thomas did a lot hard work to remove nasty #defines in the past which we should honor as this was our decision.
Furthermore we have SVN for exactly such trials. Such experiments should be done in a branch as it is not our overall-goal to support compilation with VC. IMHO for C::B being a cross-platform IDE it just causes more hassle than benefits. Look at the wxWidgets sources itself what hacks are in there just to support other compilers. It's OK if you need it or if it's a design decision, but both is not the case for us.
Edit: To make it clear: I don't want to stop the work, just do it in the right place. As e.g. Jens with the console branch.
Biplab:
--- Quote from: oBFusCATed on April 06, 2011, 08:24:59 pm ---The backtraces have less info in them (there is a doc at work describing the problems) ...
Also http://www.rotateright.com/faq.html#UserInterface_2
--- End quote ---
Is this applicable on 64 bit Windows?
--- Quote from: MortenMacFly on April 06, 2011, 08:29:42 pm ---Edit: To make it clear: I don't want to stop the work, just do it in the right place. As e.g. Jens with the console branch.
--- End quote ---
If the direction is not to include such patches to trunk then it is not necessary to create a branch and then abandon it later. I'd rather keep my local copy in sync and dump the whole patched source somewhere in the web. :)
MortenMacFly:
--- Quote from: Biplab on April 07, 2011, 02:23:09 am ---If the direction is not to include such patches to trunk then it is not necessary to create a branch and then abandon it later. I'd rather keep my local copy in sync and dump the whole patched source somewhere in the web. :)
--- End quote ---
I didn't mean to abandon. Its easy to keep the branch in sync with trunk. We did this so often in the past and have two active branches that do so just fine. It's an experiment in the end, needed for a special purpose from time-to-time. The main stream development has to be in MinGW/GCC.
So, whenever you need the branch make it in sync with trunk and use it. These are 3 mouse clicks in my SVN software. And once stabilised you wouldn't even cause conflicts as there won't be much changes. And if we come to design guidelines (e.g. never do something like:
--- Code: ---_("text....\n"
"more text...")
--- End code ---
)
...which we apply in trunk the differences will be minimised.
Why do you believe it would be better to
--- Quote from: Biplab on April 07, 2011, 02:23:09 am ---dump the whole patched source somewhere in the web. :)
--- End quote ---
then??? It will make it way harder to handle.
Loaden:
--- Quote from: MortenMacFly on April 06, 2011, 05:20:35 pm ---
--- Quote from: Loaden on April 06, 2011, 02:42:38 pm ---Bad news, And I can't fix this issue. :(
--- End quote ---
Well, you'll need to do something like:
Old:
--- Code: ---_("text....\n"
"more text...")
--- End code ---
New:
--- Code: ---_("text....\nmore text...")
--- End code ---
...or:
--- Code: ---wxString str = _("text....\n")
+ _("more text...");
--- End code ---
--- End quote ---
I know this, but it can't support multi-line, or lead broke the whole string.
Can someone have a better way?
Loaden:
Hello everybody, now there is a very perplexing question: Why build CB use VC compiler will cause startup crash?
If the code is robust enough to write, then use a different compiler should be able to run.
But now I start again busy, so I can not continue.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version