Code::Blocks vs. Visual Studio

[pghtech]

I posted a similar topic were I was able to get some colorful adjectives for what people thought of Code::Blocks.  However, I am just starting to use Code::Blocks, but have been using a couple different version of VC (6 and 2005express).  So, I have been considering whether or not I should drop the $250 odd dollars for the standard or.....see howthe community of Code::Blocks stacks it against VC 2005 before dropping that money?

Thanks in advance

[sethjackson]

I posted a similar topic were I was able to get some colorful adjectives for what people thought of Code::Blocks.  However, I am just starting to use Code::Blocks, but have been using a couple different version of VC (6 and 2005express).  So, I have been considering whether or not I should drop the $250 odd dollars for the standard or.....see howthe community of Code::Blocks stacks it against VC 2005 before dropping that money?

Thanks in advance

Umm you want an IDE camparision? I don't think you can get VS for $250???  :shock:

Why use a non-cross platform, bloated, slow IDE when you can use Code::Blocks (which is none of those)?

[pghtech]

SethJackson:
Thanks for the repy:  I am pretty sure you can pick up the (non-academic, *full version*) standard edition for ~$250 give or take a few dollars - maybe your thinking of the professional edition which starts getting closer to $600.

[sethjackson]

SethJackson:
Thanks for the repy:  I am pretty sure you can pick up the (non-academic, *full version*) standard edition for ~$250 give or take a few dollars - maybe your thinking of the professional edition which starts getting closer to $600.

Ah ok yes I was.

Anyways what does VS do better?
I can think of one off the top of my head. Mainly Intellisense (code-completion).
Why would you want to use VS over Code::Blocks?

[pghtech]

Only because I am familar with it, and was planning on doing so until I started looking into Code::Blocks.

[sethjackson]

Only because I am familar with it, and was planning on doing so until I started looking into Code::Blocks.

Oh well then download a nightly build, and see how you like Code::Blocks.

[kidmosey]

A few things you might miss (for a little while) when you switch over to C::B from VS:

1.  VS style document switching - using ctrl+tab to switch to the last document is a pretty nice feature.
2.  Incremental builds - it seemed like VS was faster for compiling.  This is more an issue with gcc, maybe.
3.  Code completion - For now, C::B has a ways to go to fix this.
4.  Low maintainence - Personally, I rarely had to work around a compiler/linker problem and experienced very few crashes.  I am sure once RC3 is out, C::B will be the same, though.
5.  Easy installation - If you are new, installing mingw, C::B, and wxWidgets can be a pain... but well worth it.

I can't think of anything else, atm.  Honestly, it is worth using C::B over VS, even considering the above "problems".  It is smaller, faster (the interface), cross-platform, extensible, non-bloated, FREE, and a number of other adjectives.  After 5 years of using Visual Studio, C::B is a breath of fresh air.

[L_O_J]

A few things you might miss (for a little while) when you switch over to C::B from VS:

1.  VS style document switching - using ctrl+tab to switch to the last document is a pretty nice feature.
2.  Incremental builds - it seemed like VS was faster for compiling.  This is more an issue with gcc, maybe.
3.  Code completion - For now, C::B has a ways to go to fix this.
4.  Low maintainence - Personally, I rarely had to work around a compiler/linker problem and experienced very few crashes.  I am sure once RC3 is out, C::B will be the same, though.
5.  Easy installation - If you are new, installing mingw, C::B, and wxWidgets can be a pain... but well worth it.

I agree with the above quote, but if you ask me, what I will really miss VisualAssistX, I mean if I have to choose between VS only and C::B I will choose C::B, BUT if VisualAssistX is added, then (sorry) I will choose VS + VisualAssistX. oh on thing that the above should also mention is debugging. IMHO C::B is still not as comfortable as VS in debugging.

[Phatency]

With the latest work on the debugger, I would never go back to Visual Studio (IDE). And the compile speed issue is more of an issue of MinGW, not gcc. To my experience, there isn't any noticeable difference between using Microsoft Visual C++ compiler on Visual Studio or Code::Blocks.

[Zingam]

There are quite a lot of things that VS does better and one is the way it handles projects/solutions. I really prefer it over what C::B has but CB is nice and I like it. Something that C::B really sucks at is the Find/Replace dialog. I really wonder why the devs don't want to improve it.

BTW how can one add other compilers to C::B?

On Linux C::B keeps on crashing since the very beginning. I've tried it on different Ubuntu versions \and installations - of course\ on my laptop and it has always crashed. It is actually unusable on Linux on my computer.

 :shock:Why?

[Kreso]

I have to disagree, C::B works perfectly on linux. I compile each SVN trunk version myself and have never experienced odd problems (execpt ofcourse bugs that happen during development, but this is an unstable branch

I've used VC for a long time, but after finding C::B I don't think I'll ever go back. Ok, I'll have to wait a bit for C::B to get more stable and usable (Codecompletion,debugging), but even in the current state, I use it every day for our project.

Keep up the good work guys!!!

[Commodore64]

On Linux C::B keeps on crashing since the very beginning. I've tried it on different Ubuntu versions \and installations - of course\ on my laptop and it has always crashed. It is actually unusable on Linux on my computer.

 :shock:Why?

Did you try to disable code completion plugin?

[sethjackson]

Something that C::B really sucks at is the Find/Replace dialog. I really wonder why the devs don't want to improve it.

(emphasis added)

What makes you think that?  :shock:
The devs are always looking for ways to improve the IDE.
First this isn't a high priority (check the roadmap).
Second is the devs do this for free, and in their spare time.

Hey patches are welcome.

[MortenMacFly]

Something that C::B really sucks at is the Find/Replace dialog.

Nice you don't tell us what exactly sucks. I use these dialogs in everydays work and I don't see anything "sucking". Mind to explain yourself a little more next time?
With regards, Morten.

[lubos]

i think c::b is better than vs2005
for me miss only one thing - can't "auto-hide" project explorer as in vs(can you do that :lol:)