IDEs vs editors

Started by
56 comments, last by jacmoe 8 years, 10 months ago

You are entirely out to lunch Graelig.

It's a pity that you can't figure out how to invoke nmake from the shell and that CMake is giving you a hard time and that you find it difficult to function without an IDE, but I guess you will survive. smile.png

You are asking why I would like to not use an IDE, and the reason is that it is much, much faster to just fire off a batch of commands instead of opening the IDE (takes a while to load), load the solution and all projects (takes even longer to load), wait for intellisense to do it's parsing, and then finally activate the project that you want to build, select the right configuration and hit build. Whew, that's a lot of waiting and clicking, isn't it?

Of course, when you are coding, then an IDE is great, because then you actually need the intelli-sense and the nice UI. Not when you just want to configure and build the damn thing. :)

I am not off-topic: if you are using an editor for programming then you need to call the build tools (nmake/make) from the shell. Could be Emacs, Sublime Text, Notepad++,..

Code::Blocks (which is an IDE) does call out to MinGW or Microsoft's build tools too, it's not as obvious as when you do it manually.

Too many projects; too much time

Advertisement
Well, whatever. I don't think anyone can really think it's much of an option on windows unless they have a 'ideological' reason to want to. At any rate I spent tons of time on it, I won't waste another second bothering to try.

This thumbsdown spam all the time for no reason is incredible. I would complain to the mods but I would not be surprised some of them are part of it.

This is my thread. There are many threads like it, but this one is mine.

Cmake is pretty awful. That is one reason I did not stick with Ogre.


Have you ever taken a look at premake? I've seen it used in at least one AAA shop I've worked at and it seemed to work pretty well. Of course, there we had dedicated tools and build engineers to maintain this stuff.

You have an extra build step, and at the end you still have to build things.


Every place I've worked at that used tech like this had batch scripts to automate all of this. They had to, order for the build server to work! Most build server processes I've seen work like this:
- sync to latest code/data
- generate projects for the requested platform and configuration
- build the code and tools using the generated projects
- optionally build the data
- run automated tests on the game
- if the tests passed, check in the built binaries

One extra step that takes almost no time isn't a big deal, here.

You are asking why I would like to not use an IDE, and the reason is that it is much, much faster to just fire off a batch of commands instead of opening the IDE (takes a while to load), load the solution and all projects (takes even longer to load), wait for intellisense to do it's parsing, and then finally activate the project that you want to build, select the right configuration and hit build. Whew, that's a lot of waiting and clicking, isn't it?
Of course, when you are coding, then an IDE is great, because then you actually need the intelli-sense and the nice UI. Not when you just want to configure and build the damn thing. smile.png


How often are you building the game when you aren't coding? In multiple places where I've worked, simply building the game (eg. release candidates) is often done by a build server that invokes the command-line tools like MSBuild, but actual work is done through the IDE. MSBuild exists and works fine, there's no reason to open your IDE to build.

Working with a raw editor is certainly possible on Windows with cygwin, it's just that there's no particularly convincing reason not to use the IDE if it's there. Imagine that you're given the choice between using a slide-rule and a pocket calculator to do some engineering calculations. Both will work fine, but which one would you use?

Yes, that was my point: you don't need to open the IDE to build.

I am building my framework/application/game frequently without coding to test that it builds in different configurations, but I also open the IDE to code (obviously) and then I choose either QtCreator or Visual Studio depending on what kind of work I do.

Swiftcoder: I know that you hate CMake, and I love it. And that we can never meet smile.png

It's just ironic, I think, because amongst SCons, Premake and CMake and a lot of other build script tools, it is only CMake that has a dependency management system built on top of it. It's called Bicode, and I know of several other projects that predates that.

But let's just let it rest for now. happy.png

Too many projects; too much time

A reminder to several people about the site's posting guidelines, specifically the rule:

  • Insults and personal attacks on other members will not be tolerated.

While it is fine to mention a name and quote a statement when debating a counter example, the personal attacks need to stop.

Thank you. Let's now return to the merits and debate about IDEs vs Editors.


Vim's main weakness is its "QuickFix" list for jumping to compile-time errors; C++ can generate monster reports which are nigh impossible to follow in vim. But I only recently discovered the :copen command which I'm sure will help a lot. Having youcompleteme highlight most errors before I compile is a huge help too. But some errors can't easily be detected until the full build process due to template instantiation, and those tend to be the biggest monsters.

I'm a little late to the party. Sorry. If you use make or CMake to generate the make files, and use the built in :make vim command, it will automatically jump to the first error in the code, even without using the :copen stuff.

As far as editors, I've not used XCode. I have used JEdit, Eclipse (Java/C++), NetBeans, IntelliJ, QtCreator, and Visual Studio 6 all the way to vs 2013. You can't get tied to an editor at work, because sometimes you have to use what everyone else is using. I prefer vim, but I've just started down that road this year, so who knows.

I love vim, and I using it for everything, on Windows 7 and Ubuntu. But at work, it is awkward when someone else is reviewing some code and then they try to type something. It's funny to watch, but not very helpful. I've usually got a Visual Studio or QtCreator open in the background so they will feel more comfortable.

I think, therefore I am. I think? - "George Carlin"
My Website: Indie Game Programming

My Twitter: https://twitter.com/indieprogram

My Book: http://amzn.com/1305076532


I'm a little late to the party. Sorry. If you use make or CMake to generate the make files, and use the built in :make vim command, it will automatically jump to the first error in the code, even without using the :copen stuff.

Yeah, that's what I was doing all along, using :cn and :cl if there was more than one error. But often it's much more helpful if you can have the code and (more than one) error message in view at the same time, which is where :copen helps.

Well, whatever. I don't think anyone can really think it's much of an option on windows unless they have a 'ideological' reason to want to. At any rate I spent tons of time on it, I won't waste another second bothering to try.

I just wanted to point out that there are a couple of very good reasons for not firing up the IDE and that it is more common to call the MS build tools from the command-line than you might think (and for non-ideological reasons too); I didn't mean it to be a hard-core rule. tongue.png
I like an IDE and the productivity that it provides.

Too many projects; too much time

This topic is closed to new replies.

Advertisement