LinuxQuestions.org - Good IDE for C/C++

- Slackware (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/)

- - Good IDE for C/C++ (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/good-ide-for-c-c-809499/)

Good IDE for C/C++

I'm looking for a good IDE for C/C++, that runs well in slackware.
I used CodeBlocks, but I can't compile in the current, and its getting a little old.

I see a lot of threads talking about anjunta and kdedeveloper, but I don't like these.

Someone have any suggestion?

QtCreator.

Fantastic IDE, and definitely not just for Qt.

Qt creator is also suggested by blender devs

http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Us...QTCreatorLinux

Eclipse with CDT (the C developers tools) is nice.

Vim + Ctags + Nerdtree ;)

I'm using Qt creator, its only good for C++, and just make projects based on pro files and qmake.
I'm looking for something more general.

I will try geany.

Geany have potential, but lacks the concept of project, only work with single files.

Emacs with Emacs Code Browser (http://ecb.sourceforge.net/) and CEDET (http://cedet.sourceforge.net/).

Because Slackware seem like is a KDE taliban, I suggest KDevelop.

However, even KDE(4) is the main Slackware desktop environment, they awful insult the present and future KDE/Qt developers, stripping down the entire Qt4 documentation, thinking to strip 50MB OF DOCUMENTATION, from a blue whale with size likely of 4GB.

What a shame for a Linux distro that use KDE as main D.E.!

Quote:

Originally Posted by LuckyCyborg (Post 3977890)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alien Bob (Post 3852449)

Slackware uses the KDE team's copy of Qt. This copy contains patches to fix KDE crashes, these patches are not yet present in the original Qt repository. The qt-copy tarball of the KDE team does not contain any documentation.
We will not ship this documentation either because it is big, and available online.

There is a reason why we use a particular version of Qt: we use whatever the KDE team recommends to be used in combination with a specific version of KDE. For Slackware 13.0, we use KDE 4.2.4 for which the recommented version of Qt is 4.5.x.

For KDE 4.4 the recommended version of Qt will be 4.6.1

Eric

Is that sufficient?

Quote:

What a shame for a Linux distro that use KDE as main D.E.!

If only Slackware shipped with XFCE, FVWM, blackbox, fluxbox, mwm, twm, or windowmaker! Imagine a world where you could only select anything other than KDE from the kdm login screen!

Wait, we're already in that world.

this is a(n other) sufficient explanation why it not a good idea to follow the kde devs to much and shows again how kde pulls down slackware's quality.
(sorry for that, I am still a kde user but from time to time I have to say some bad words about kde:-)

Quote:

Originally Posted by mlpa (Post 3977740)

I'm looking for a good IDE for C/C++

Quote:

Originally Posted by mlpa (Post 3977885)

I'm using Qt creator, its only good for C++.

Well, you did specifically ask for a C/C++ IDE. Can we have a better idea of what you're looking for? And, for that matter, why you don't like Ajunta and KDevelop?

Since your first post, you've further specified that you want an IDE that supports project files and multiple languages. In that case, I recommend Netbeans.

Quote:

Originally Posted by T3slider (Post 3978042)

Is that sufficient?

No.

First, because the KDE-Qt (used by Slackware) contains the documentation in a source form. It's enough to add this sequence (in the qt.SlackBuild) for building the documentation and installing it:

Code:

# Build and install the shameful documentation

make docs

./config.status

make install_htmldocs install_qchdocs install_docimages INSTALL_ROOT=$PKG || exit 1

Second, the on-line availability argument fail, because not all of us have a broadband connection. How about to use a low band 3G internet connection or dial-up? We talk about poor users of i486 systems but we ignore the poor internet connections?

We have only a single remaining objective: to reduce the size of Slackware blue whale with 50MB, stripping the rich Qt documentation. This is shameful!

IF the Qt documentation size is a really big problem, how about moving it in another (optional) package, i.e. named qt-docs?