Linux Programming IDE - Kdevelop, Bluefish, or ?

[fos]

I have been using vi and emacs for a long time. I can't say that either is the best development environment because I haven't used much of anything else.

I installed Kdevelop and Bluefish on a whim.

What are the pros and cons of IDEs and what is your favorite IDE?

fos...

[stafio]

I can't say that I have a favourite IDE for Linux yet, as I haven't done too much coding of any kind in Linux, but one of my favourite programs for Windows is being ported. HTML Kit has a simple, easy to use interface (IMHO), but has lots of features within it. It includes support for multiple languages (both scripting and programming), FTP access, built in preview, auto-complete, the ability to validate HTML, XML, and CSS, is extendable via plugins, etc. A full list can be seen here (http://www.chami.com/html-kit/features/).

I haven't had much free time lately, so I haven't gotten a chance to check out the Linux version (http://www.html-kit.com/docs/hkt/linux/) yet, but I'll definitely give it a try when I can. At this point, you have to sign up to try it as the program is only in alpha and the developers are looking for feedback from users. I would think that it will be available to all once it is in beta or the final release.

[danieldk]

My usual environment is vi(m), though I use Eclipse for Java programming. I think that Eclipse will satisfy my programming needs for other languages in the future.

[jpaulb]

I have been using vi and emacs for a long time. I can't say that either is the best development environment because I haven't used much of anything else.

I installed Kdevelop and Bluefish on a whim.

What are the pros and cons of IDEs and what is your favorite IDE?

fos...

I have been using Bluefish for the last 2 1/2 years, It is for me quite uncomplicated. I have tried Quanta a few time however it doesn't seem to be my style. Also tried openoffice to develop web pages, that is definitely not what I would use. It is too inflexible throws out any code that it doesn't understand, like PHP, Java script.

[jjmac]

FLTK is a nice designer for my needs as i don't like all the bloated auto config stuff the other ide's try to generate. If i could turn all that rubbish off i would probably consider using them. Thats just the free stuff, haven't tried any of the proprietary Linux environments. Not refering to Borlands Kylix , that is a total joke in my opinion. I found it impossible to get the scheme fonts readable. And there was no way to configure that. Plus, i don't like programs that create programs that are closed ... one never knows just what extras it may have coded inside them :)


But, must admit, i miss the CBuilder from my old OSR2 (grin)

Linux really needs a ide that really is flexible. They all strict me as trying to impress rather than anything else.

Who needs 250k of major project configs auto generated just for a simple test program (good_friggen_grief.png) :)

All the backend tools are all there any way, such as emacs, ... a great editor __once__ a person gets used to it. It does come with its' own psychiatrist to handle that stage. And the FLTK designer is as smooth as Borlands CBuilder. So it does me :)


jm
http://counter.li.org
#313537

[fos]

Thanks JM, I'm starting another class at the university Monday evening. I will look into FLTK when they require something creative.

fos....

[jjmac]

Howdy,

fos wrote:
>>
Thanks JM, I'm starting another class at the university Monday evening. I will look into FLTK when they require something creative.
>>


FLTK is based on the old 'forms' library. And basically acts as a wrapper for the Athen widgets. It is very light. The 8 libs that come with the whole thing, '.a' and '.so' amount to only a couple of Mbs'.

It has a novel way of allowing for customisation too :)

The whole ide is presented as a set of projects.

So one just has to open each in turn, and then make any alterations -=- font/font size, colour etc , then compile that project. Close the ide, reopen, and theres that aspect customised. From there it just continues. No configs needed as it's all wisywig and option boxes (grin). It took me ages to figure that out.

Aside from the light foot print, the smoothness and stability of the designer it self atracts me the most. As thats all it actually is, a designer.

It relies on the person to make use of the existing toolset on their box for the rest of their project creation. And as that toolset already exists, it allows for quite a good environment to actually learn how to use that toolset. While also getting a good gui app out of the whole exercise.

The only critism that i had was that the code for the gui part of an application was in a somewhat stylised scriptish form.

I had to work a script to translate it into straight c++, just for neatness sake. And the way it includes its' default 'include' header required some manipulation. So that my own associated units would get included in its' build process.

That all turned out to be minor in the end. But it would have been handy if it had been documented.

I haven't looked at it for quite a while, but i will over the next couple of days and post a more specific description of that process.


jm
http://counter.li.org
#313537

[Magnus]

I admit I usually use emacs for my limited web development, but lately I've been trying nvu (http://www.nvu.com). I think it's somehow related to what used to be the Mozilla suite, but I might be wrong. So far I think it's quite nice, but I'm mostly using it for quick testing of different options - then I usually go back to emacs to actually implement it.

Nvu is available as source and compiled binaries for a few different platforms (both Linux, Mac and Windows). To use it with Sarge you need to use a backport.

For other programming purposes I usually use emacs, but I'll probably learn vim soon just to compare them.

Best Wishes
/Magnus

[fos]

Hi everyone,

Verizon DSL is down at home again. :( I'm at the university downloadding a c compiler the professor wants us to use for the C++ course. It is a windows adaptation of gnu gcc.

The prof expects everything done in the Windoze environment. I asked her if it would be ok to use gnu gcc in a Linux environment with vi or emacs. Would you believe she didn't have a clue? She told me to place a trial source code file in her drop box and she would try it out. Trouble is, if it doesn't work, I'm on the short end.

I explained that I had no interest in writing code for Windows and preferred the OSS model. She didn't seem to understand or care. The course catalog made no mention of Windows and seemed to be a generic C++.

Sad to say, Windows is generic for most people.

fos....

I'm seriously looking into hughes.net internet service.

[kmoffat]

Has anyone tried Lazarus? It is Delphi for Linux, a pascal ide with drag and drop designer, and is very fast and effective. If you can live with pascal it's a beauty.

[danieldk]

Has anyone tried Lazarus? It is Delphi for Linux, a pascal ide with drag and drop designer, and is very fast and effective. If you can live with pascal it's a beauty.

It's ok. Last time I tried Lazarus it was still a bit rough around the edges, and it created *HUGE* binaries.

[jjmac]

Just to complete my previous post from a couple of weeks ago.

Seems my concerns were trivial, it has been a couple of years since i last used it.

I was thinking of additional include files. That can all be done via adding the appropriate declaration(s) in the project listing. And by checking or unchecking the 'include project header' checkbox in the 'project preferences' dialog.

Also, the configuration of the ide itself all occures through the projects in the 'fluid' directory. The rest of the package dosen't need recompiling when tweaks are made there.

Quite flexible really, considering the size of it all ...


jm