User forums > General (but related to Code::Blocks)
Possibility to support another compiler (Pelles C)
RJP Computing:
--- Quote from: tiwag on January 09, 2007, 05:23:08 pm ---why should one do that ?
Pelles C comes with its own nice IDE, well designed and powerful built in debugger ...
--- End quote ---
True, PellesC does come with an IDE, but I think it would be nice (not mandatory) to have one common development environment.
Plus if the idea was never to add support for compilers with good IDE's then Visual C++ 8.0 wouldn't be supported. ;)
Phatency:
--- Quote from: RJP Computing on January 09, 2007, 06:07:56 pm ---Plus if the idea was never to add support for compilers with good IDE's then Visual C++ 8.0 wouldn't be supported. ;)
--- End quote ---
Good IDE!? What are you on?
lubos:
--- Quote from: Phatency on January 09, 2007, 08:11:35 pm ---
--- Quote from: RJP Computing on January 09, 2007, 06:07:56 pm ---Plus if the idea was never to add support for compilers with good IDE's then Visual C++ 8.0 wouldn't be supported. ;)
--- End quote ---
Good IDE!? What are you on?
--- End quote ---
some people love it, some hate it, as always.
RJP Computing:
--- Quote from: Phatency on January 09, 2007, 08:11:35 pm ---Good IDE!? What are you on?
--- End quote ---
Come on. You and I both know that good is subjective and yes everybody that is here on the Code::Blocks forum is here because they like Code::Blocks. I didn't say that it is the best and everything else stinks, I was just meaning that it had a full IDE already that had a code editor, debugger and visual designer just like PellesC.
:D
killerbot:
calm calm.
If we can support another compiler (so not debugging), then that's a good thing. Several of the compilers we support have their own IDE (eg . M$ , Borland, Watcom, Intel ,..), but if you can stay within the same IDE when working on different projects, it's nice. Plus also for CB it's nice to have a wide support. But let's take step for step, since it is difficult to know all compiler settings, and the logic has to be simple (eg : mutual exclusive settings, we don't do that), so you tick a whole bunch of options where the compiler might tell you in then end the mix is not correct. But we offer the settings, the user with sound knowledge ticks what he wants.
So once we have a substantial set of settins for a compiler we can start and later on adjust or expand.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version