12 replies to this topic

[patisake]

I read on the internet that dev-c++ from bloodshed is not updated and is full of bugs?
Is this true and if it is what is the best tool to use instead?

[J. Evola's Apprentice]

There are many ways: eclipse, code::blocks, visual studio express, just vim or emacs.

[Cornstalks]

Our very own jbadams wrote a great blog post about this: Why You Shouldn't Use Dev-C++. Note that some people have tried to "update" Dev-C++, in which case he wrote the following response: Should you use an updated version of Dev-C++?. In those posts he talks about some great alternatives.

[JTippetts]

I understand that another developer has taken up Dev C++ and is actively working on it. I tried it, briefly, but I still personally prefer Code::Blocks for those rare times when I actually do C++ anymore.

[EddieV223]

There is wxDev-C++ which is being update, however I still don't recommend it.

For cross platform I suggest QT Creator, the QT libraries you should learn anyway they are amazing.

For windows only you can do Visual Studio 2012 ( though consider using QT Creator anyway )

There is also Eclipse CDT, it has LOTS of features, but I find it difficult to use and slow.

Also Code::Blocks, its ok but hasn't been updated in a couple years and lacks many features.

[jbadams]

There is wxDev-C++ which is being update, however I still don't recommend it

Or Orwell Dev-C++ -- I took a look at both of them in my article on using updated versions of Dev-C++ (linked above), and although they still wouldn't be my choice either there aren't objectively any serious problems with them. If choosing between the two I would probably currently recommend Orwell rather than wxDev-C++.

Also Code::Blocks, its ok but hasn't been updated in a couple years and lacks many features.

Code::Blocks is updated regularly, but you need to use their nightly builds rather than the "stable release", which they only rarely package for download.

[Alpha_ProgDes]

I read on the internet that dev-c++ from bloodshed is not updated and is full of bugs?
Is this true and if it is what is the best tool to use instead?

Just use Code::Blocks.

[Art n Peace]

As a straight up noob, I use Orwell Dev C++

I wanted to use something more substantial/long term like Netbeans or VS, but I couldn't get them set-up properly. Not newb friendly at all I had to download other pieces of software, install them, set them up in the IDE ...and I just barely understand what an IDE is so I just gave it up for now and went with Dev C++. It's plug and play.

All the advice here so far is great, though. Thanks everyone

[Cornstalks]

I wanted to use something more substantial/long term like Netbeans

I feel bad for people who try to use Netbeans for C++. I'm sorry you had to suffer those pains.

or VS, but I couldn't get them set-up properly.

Visual Studio should "just work"...

Not newb friendly at all

I will say something Dev-C++ does that makes it more n00b friendly is simply allowing you to compile and run a single file. Most other IDEs want you to create a proper project, but when you're just starting out you just want to write a simple 20 line test program and hit "run." And I think this is why people keep using Dev-C++. It is true that most other IDEs are targeted for professional/more serious use, but once I got the hang of Visual Studio (and most importantly its debugger) I never looked back to Dev-C++.

[mhagain]

I'd suggest that if you're having problems with VS then you're probably guilty of making it complicated for yourself, e.g. by coming into it with assumptions that you'll have to download lots of SDKs and libs, pop them into specific directories, set up paths, etc. None of that is actually necessary with VS - installing is quite literally "Next/Next/Finish" (especially with the Express editions), then you're in File | New | Project, pick your type, add a file, compile, run.

[EddieV223]

I'd suggest that if you're having problems with VS then you're probably guilty of making it complicated for yourself, e.g. by coming into it with assumptions that you'll have to download lots of SDKs and libs, pop them into specific directories, set up paths, etc. None of that is actually necessary with VS - installing is quite literally "Next/Next/Finish" (especially with the Express editions), then you're in File | New | Project, pick your type, add a file, compile, run.

++this. vs is very easy. So is QT Creator, when you install the sdk, it even comes with mingw, which defaults to the selected compiler. Just click ok and start coding.

Edited by EddieV223, 08 November 2012 - 07:28 PM.

[radioteeth]

I used DevC++ for a few years, and dealing with all the bugs simply taught me to unconsciously hit ctrl-s almost virtually everything I change in a source file.

If you are a minimalist like myself and enjoy the overall feel of DevC++, check out an alternative called MinGWStudio http://koti.mbnet.fi/vaultec/mingwstudio.php

It is also no longer maintained, but I have experienced zero bugs, and it looks and feels almost exactly like DevC++.

[larspensjo]

Code::Blocks is updated regularly, but you need to use their nightly builds rather than the "stable release", which they only rarely package for download.

I also recommend to go for Code::Blocks. And actually, the nightly build usually contains packages ready for downloading, both for Windows and Linux. So you do not need to build from the source. The latest is from November 2.