• S. Chancellor (5/5) Feb 12 2006 I wonder if it would be possible to easily convert this package to use
• Roald Ribe (8/12) Feb 12 2006 If you are seriously looking into an IDE, I would suggest having a
• Venix (3/19) Feb 17 2006 Codeblocks SVN now has DMD & GDC support for windows. Doesn't support
• =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= (5/11) Feb 18 2006 I can also recommend Code::Blocks. It can import Dev-C++ projects, too.
• S. Chancellor (5/19) Feb 18 2006 My interest in it is providing a "Whole D Package" for people. Like
• Cris (4/8) Mar 07 2006 Yes Code::Blocks would be a perfect IDE for such a packaged. You could
• Fredrik Olsson (9/14) Feb 12 2006 Bloodshed Dev-C++ have one major disadvantage; it is written in Delphi.
• John Stoneham (8/25) Feb 17 2006 One other downside is that once installed it is almost impossible to

S. Chancellor <dnewsgr mephit.kicks-ass.org> writes:

I wonder if it would be possible to easily convert this package to use 
gdc instead of gcc?  Changing the syntax coloring over seems trivial.
(http://www.bloodshed.net/devcpp.html)  An integrated package like this 
is very conducive to attracting developers.


-S.

Roald Ribe <rr.nospam nospam.teikom.no> writes:

S. Chancellor wrote:
 I wonder if it would be possible to easily convert this package to use 
 gdc instead of gcc?  Changing the syntax coloring over seems trivial.
 (http://www.bloodshed.net/devcpp.html)  An integrated package like this 
 is very conducive to attracting developers.

If you are seriously looking into an IDE, I would suggest having a
look at Code::Blocks (www.codeblocks.org) before making a choice.
It already supports the Digital Mars C/C++ compiler and GCC, and
has a structure to add additional compilers. It already runs on
Win32, Linux and FreeBSD. I can not vouch for the quality (have not
tested it much) but it looks impressive on the surface.

Roald

Venix <venix1 hotmail.com> writes:

Roald Ribe wrote:
 S. Chancellor wrote:
 
 I wonder if it would be possible to easily convert this package to use 
 gdc instead of gcc?  Changing the syntax coloring over seems trivial.
 (http://www.bloodshed.net/devcpp.html)  An integrated package like 
 this is very conducive to attracting developers.

 
 
 If you are seriously looking into an IDE, I would suggest having a
 look at Code::Blocks (www.codeblocks.org) before making a choice.
 It already supports the Digital Mars C/C++ compiler and GCC, and
 has a structure to add additional compilers. It already runs on
 Win32, Linux and FreeBSD. I can not vouch for the quality (have not
 tested it much) but it looks impressive on the surface.
 
 Roald

Codeblocks SVN now has DMD & GDC support for windows.  Doesn't support 
the /++ & ++/ comments tho.

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:

Roald Ribe wrote:

 If you are seriously looking into an IDE, I would suggest having a
 look at Code::Blocks (www.codeblocks.org) before making a choice.
 It already supports the Digital Mars C/C++ compiler and GCC, and
 has a structure to add additional compilers. It already runs on
 Win32, Linux and FreeBSD. I can not vouch for the quality (have not
 tested it much) but it looks impressive on the surface.

I can also recommend Code::Blocks. It can import Dev-C++ projects, too.

It is using the wxWidgets interface library, making it very portable.
There is a Mac OS X port of Code::Blocks in progress, by the way... ;-)

--anders

S. Chancellor <dnewsgr mephit.kicks-ass.org> writes:

On 2006-02-12 19:55:03 -0800, Roald Ribe <rr.nospam nospam.teikom.no> said:

 S. Chancellor wrote:
 I wonder if it would be possible to easily convert this package to use 
 gdc instead of gcc?  Changing the syntax coloring over seems trivial.
 (http://www.bloodshed.net/devcpp.html)  An integrated package like this 
 is very conducive to attracting developers.

 
 If you are seriously looking into an IDE, I would suggest having a
 look at Code::Blocks (www.codeblocks.org) before making a choice.
 It already supports the Digital Mars C/C++ compiler and GCC, and
 has a structure to add additional compilers. It already runs on
 Win32, Linux and FreeBSD. I can not vouch for the quality (have not
 tested it much) but it looks impressive on the surface.
 
 Roald


My interest in it is providing a "Whole D Package" for people.  Like 
ActivePython, Dev-C++ or likewise.  It would be a real boon to people 
to have this.

-S,

Cris <central_p hotmail.com> writes:

 
 My interest in it is providing a "Whole D Package" for people.  Like 
 ActivePython, Dev-C++ or likewise.  It would be a real boon to people to 
 have this.

Yes Code::Blocks would be a perfect IDE for such a packaged. You could 
compile GDC and distribute it with Code::Blocks and also have DMD.

Thought Code::Blocks support for D needs lots of work too it has bugs 
and it's not full. Unfortunately I cannot help much myself yet.

Fredrik Olsson <peylow treyst.se> writes:

S. Chancellor skrev:
 I wonder if it would be possible to easily convert this package to use 
 gdc instead of gcc?  Changing the syntax coloring over seems trivial.
 (http://www.bloodshed.net/devcpp.html)  An integrated package like this 
 is very conducive to attracting developers.
 

Bloodshed Dev-C++ have one major disadvantage; it is written in Delphi. 
I like Delphi myself, but as a detoxed Windows user I see huge 
portability problems.

A port to Linux could be possible using Kylix, but then only on Intel 
hardware. Using Freepascal and Lazarus is another option, but Lazarus is 
not quite as mature as one would like.

So my vote is no on this one :(.

// Fredrik

John Stoneham <captnjameskirk moc.oohay> writes:

Fredrik Olsson wrote:
 S. Chancellor skrev:
 I wonder if it would be possible to easily convert this package to use 
 gdc instead of gcc?  Changing the syntax coloring over seems trivial.
 (http://www.bloodshed.net/devcpp.html)  An integrated package like 
 this is very conducive to attracting developers.

 Bloodshed Dev-C++ have one major disadvantage; it is written in Delphi. 
 I like Delphi myself, but as a detoxed Windows user I see huge 
 portability problems.
 
 A port to Linux could be possible using Kylix, but then only on Intel 
 hardware. Using Freepascal and Lazarus is another option, but Lazarus is 
 not quite as mature as one would like.
 
 So my vote is no on this one :(.
 
 // Fredrik

One other downside is that once installed it is almost impossible to 
remove! There is no Uninstall Start-menu item, no "uninstall.exe" in the 
program directory, no entry in Add/Removes Programs, and it plops files 
down in hidden directories and makes Registry entries, so simply 
deleting the program directory is no good. There are a few forum entries 
around the net on how to remove it manually, which is a complicated 
process. I wish I had known this before I tried it out!