Recent Posts

51

Nightly builds / Re: The 24 March 2026 build (13828) is out.

« Last post by ccdric on April 03, 2026, 04:08:26 pm »

attached is the post I tried to send (many time even without attached files) and it failed
Any Idee why ?

52

Nightly builds / Re: The 24 March 2026 build (13828) is out.

« Last post by ccdric on April 03, 2026, 03:58:59 pm »

sory for the previous test :-)  I tried to post with code section and short attaced file ans i had this :

Please try again. If you come back to this error screen, report the error to an administrator.

something goes wrong on this forum ?

53

Nightly builds / Re: The 24 March 2026 build (13828) is out.

« Last post by ccdric on April 03, 2026, 03:55:49 pm »

test

54

General (but related to Code::Blocks) / "which language"

« Last post by Whissind on April 03, 2026, 09:45:22 am »

When I try and set up for a new project, the IDE asks "which language" and Fortran isn't listed, only C and C++, whereas in a later frame "Fortran" is shown as the compiler. Can you explain why this is so? Is there something wrong?

55

Development / Re: It's year 2026, so I think some text like: 2024-2025 can be updated to 2026

« Last post by christo on April 02, 2026, 02:50:21 pm »

I agree that migration to git is a great idea. It  could be a game changer.  svn is not used widely. Git is superior for collaboration by design as well as tools like github or gitlab.

I think moving to github/gitlab could bring in more developers as well, hence more features/ bug fixes. Also it allows us  to upstream local changes easily by creating a pull request instead of creating a patch against an svn trunk version and uploading it to sourceforge via ticket. Now developers are not much familiar with the svn workflow.

 Hi c::b developers, could you please consider moving codeblocks to github/gitlab?

Also it is a nice idea to move to a later version of c++.

Please let me know if I can do any help with these as I would like to help as code::blocks has helped me a lot.

56

Development / Re: It's year 2026, so I think some text like: 2024-2025 can be updated to 2026

« Last post by ollydbg on April 02, 2026, 12:32:04 pm »

I mean some text in our code base, such as "copy right 2004 - 2025 Code::Blocks team" like text should be updated to "2004 - 2026".

57

Development / Re: It's year 2026, so I think some text like: 2024-2025 can be updated to 2026

« Last post by cppuser on April 02, 2026, 11:57:40 am »

I don't understand the title to be honest. 
But I vote for git, even I am not  a developer for codeblocks yet, I will be one day I hope, I am reading the code to see how it is organized.
I have some ideas to try on codeblocks which I use daily  for my personal development on my projects.
I have used svn older time at work, but I prefer git.

58

Help / Re: wx3.3.x library build

« Last post by stahta01 on April 02, 2026, 07:58:57 am »

Look for wx33_64.cbp to use wxWidgets 3.3.

59

Help / Re: wx3.3.x library build

« Last post by stahta01 on April 02, 2026, 07:57:08 am »

I rebuilt wx3.3.2 after removing CFG=64 from my make command.
Then tried rebuilding codeblocks from source, but it continued failing because wxmsw32u couldn't be found. Vazd, from wxWidgets, says that that dll is made but hasn't been in any wxWidgets releases since probably before wx3.0. The question is: Is it coming from the v23828 nightly, that I was using as a host?

Doesn't cmake only make a makefile generally? You must of had another step or two to make the wx3.3 library?  Does your library contain dll files?

Why are you building the wx3.3 and thinking it will create an wx3.2 DLL?

Tim S.

60

Help / Re: wx3.3.x library build

« Last post by stahta01 on April 02, 2026, 07:53:58 am »

Look at the build log!
Then look at the name of the DLL and the path to the DLL.
See what is wrong.

Tim S.