Comments on: Why you shouldn’t use Dev-C++ http://www.jasonbadams.net/20081218/why-you-shouldnt-use-dev-c/ Thu, 29 Jul 2010 12:13:22 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: lolex http://www.jasonbadams.net/20081218/why-you-shouldnt-use-dev-c/comment-page-1/#comment-5120 lolex Tue, 06 Apr 2010 17:44:00 +0000 http://www.jasonbadams.net/20081218/why-you-shouldnt-use-dev-c/#comment-5120 btw, was just looking at some other posts of yours and realized something - we're kinda the same. i.e. both [i assume you are] into coding and like awesome music [read: metal]. plus i was in melbourne for just over 3 years from 2004-2008. miss the party/music scene there. returning next year. anyways, not trying to be that weird guy on your blog. _lolex. btw, was just looking at some other posts of yours and realized something - we’re kinda the same. i.e. both [i assume you are] into coding and like awesome music [read: metal]. plus i was in melbourne for just over 3 years from 2004-2008. miss the party/music scene there. returning next year.

anyways, not trying to be that weird guy on your blog.

_lolex.

]]> By: lolex http://www.jasonbadams.net/20081218/why-you-shouldnt-use-dev-c/comment-page-1/#comment-5119 lolex Tue, 06 Apr 2010 17:27:45 +0000 http://www.jasonbadams.net/20081218/why-you-shouldnt-use-dev-c/#comment-5119 this showed up as a comment on my blog, so i followed it and boy am i glad i did. yes, i still use dev-c++. however, it was a far better alternative than using the [extremely] outdated turbo c++ which most of my classmates still use - since it was provided to us by our c teacher, apparently it must be the best for coding *roll eyes*. thank you for providing me with alternatives. i'm downloading microsoft visual c++ as i type this. _lolex. this showed up as a comment on my blog, so i followed it and boy am i glad i did. yes, i still use dev-c++. however, it was a far better alternative than using the [extremely] outdated turbo c++ which most of my classmates still use - since it was provided to us by our c teacher, apparently it must be the best for coding *roll eyes*.

thank you for providing me with alternatives. i’m downloading microsoft visual c++ as i type this.

_lolex.

]]> By: Larry Ullman's Blog » C++ Development Tools http://www.jasonbadams.net/20081218/why-you-shouldnt-use-dev-c/comment-page-1/#comment-5118 Larry Ullman's Blog » C++ Development Tools Sun, 04 Apr 2010 14:50:23 +0000 http://www.jasonbadams.net/20081218/why-you-shouldnt-use-dev-c/#comment-5118 [...] Windows regularly, so couldn’t make a recommend on that myself), I came across a post about why you shouldn’t use Dev-C++. That writer recommended Programmer’s Notepad, Code::Blocks (which also runs on Mac OS X and [...] [...] Windows regularly, so couldn’t make a recommend on that myself), I came across a post about why you shouldn’t use Dev-C++. That writer recommended Programmer’s Notepad, Code::Blocks (which also runs on Mac OS X and [...]

]]> By: Jason http://www.jasonbadams.net/20081218/why-you-shouldnt-use-dev-c/comment-page-1/#comment-5117 Jason Fri, 19 Mar 2010 13:46:30 +0000 http://www.jasonbadams.net/20081218/why-you-shouldnt-use-dev-c/#comment-5117 Or you could <a href="http://wiki.codeblocks.org/index.php?title=FAQ#Q:_How_do_I_make_Code::Blocks_portable.3F" rel="nofollow">do the same thing with Code::Blocks</a> and have an IDE and compiler that ISN'T outdated and buggy. Sorry, but I just don't think your argument holds much water, Code::Blocks is a viable, and in my opinion superior alternative to Dev-C++. Or you could do the same thing with Code::Blocks and have an IDE and compiler that ISN’T outdated and buggy. Sorry, but I just don’t think your argument holds much water, Code::Blocks is a viable, and in my opinion superior alternative to Dev-C++.

]]> By: Me http://www.jasonbadams.net/20081218/why-you-shouldnt-use-dev-c/comment-page-1/#comment-5116 Me Thu, 18 Mar 2010 16:58:42 +0000 http://www.jasonbadams.net/20081218/why-you-shouldnt-use-dev-c/#comment-5116 Dev-C++ can be zipped, with compiler, with SDL and other libraries included, in a zip file of less than 20MB. Unzip that on any MS Windows computer, and BOOM! You've got a working IDE + compiler + all libs you need with 5 seconds of work. For someone who develops in Linux and just wants to deploy something on various Windows computers now and then without any compiler or whatever installed on them, such a zipped Dev-C++ is the only sane solution! Dev-C++ rocks :) Dev-C++ can be zipped, with compiler, with SDL and other libraries included, in a zip file of less than 20MB.

Unzip that on any MS Windows computer, and BOOM! You’ve got a working IDE + compiler + all libs you need with 5 seconds of work.

For someone who develops in Linux and just wants to deploy something on various Windows computers now and then without any compiler or whatever installed on them, such a zipped Dev-C++ is the only sane solution!

Dev-C++ rocks :)

]]> By: Dragonsoulj http://www.jasonbadams.net/20081218/why-you-shouldnt-use-dev-c/comment-page-1/#comment-5106 Dragonsoulj Thu, 18 Feb 2010 10:30:11 +0000 http://www.jasonbadams.net/20081218/why-you-shouldnt-use-dev-c/#comment-5106 Going on free alternatives, you could install GCC or MinGW with GCC and compile from the command line. This would help if you planned to move to Linux and use the terminal. Going on free alternatives, you could install GCC or MinGW with GCC and compile from the command line. This would help if you planned to move to Linux and use the terminal.

]]> By: A word on IDE’s « ArthY303 http://www.jasonbadams.net/20081218/why-you-shouldnt-use-dev-c/comment-page-1/#comment-5104 A word on IDE’s « ArthY303 Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:44:03 +0000 http://www.jasonbadams.net/20081218/why-you-shouldnt-use-dev-c/#comment-5104 [...] because it hasn’t been updated since 2005 and the compiler that comes with it is outdated. This article summarizes best why you should not use Dev [...] [...] because it hasn’t been updated since 2005 and the compiler that comes with it is outdated. This article summarizes best why you should not use Dev [...]

]]> By: GoDK http://www.jasonbadams.net/20081218/why-you-shouldnt-use-dev-c/comment-page-1/#comment-5098 GoDK Thu, 04 Feb 2010 07:59:50 +0000 http://www.jasonbadams.net/20081218/why-you-shouldnt-use-dev-c/#comment-5098 Embarcadero For The Win. C++ Builder is miles above MSVC in my opinion. Of course it's not free, but it is the only reasonable "move up" for when you're ready for a /real/ production tool. Quality has a pricetag. :) Another alternative to Code::Blocks is Aptana Studio. It pretty much does everything, and supports everything from Java and Python to Ruby and Groovy. It's a one-stop-shop with a very nice interface. Embarcadero For The Win.

C++ Builder is miles above MSVC in my opinion.
Of course it’s not free, but it is the only reasonable “move up” for when you’re ready for a /real/ production tool.

Quality has a pricetag. :)

Another alternative to Code::Blocks is Aptana Studio.
It pretty much does everything, and supports everything from Java and Python to Ruby and Groovy.
It’s a one-stop-shop with a very nice interface.

]]> By: iLLukin mYztiKa http://www.jasonbadams.net/20081218/why-you-shouldnt-use-dev-c/comment-page-1/#comment-5085 iLLukin mYztiKa Thu, 03 Dec 2009 06:36:18 +0000 http://www.jasonbadams.net/20081218/why-you-shouldnt-use-dev-c/#comment-5085 points are well stated ! dev c's been a great alternative after Turbo C++ in many ways but with not being updated/maintained it is proving to be worthless in many courses. I'll include Code::Blocks in my updates, and thanks for taking your time to inform me on a better note :) points are well stated ! dev c’s been a great alternative after Turbo C++ in many ways but with not being updated/maintained it is proving to be worthless in many courses. I’ll include Code::Blocks in my updates, and thanks for taking your time to inform me on a better note :)

]]> By: leeor_net http://www.jasonbadams.net/20081218/why-you-shouldnt-use-dev-c/comment-page-1/#comment-5084 leeor_net Wed, 02 Dec 2009 07:42:58 +0000 http://www.jasonbadams.net/20081218/why-you-shouldnt-use-dev-c/#comment-5084 This is a fantastic blog post and one that I frequently link to whenver I'm asked about Dev-C++. I used Dev-C++ back in 2000 when it was still being updated and other freely available tools either were sub-bar (sorry, but the text-mode editors that came with GCC were severly limited when it came to the expectations of a GUI environment) or were non-existant (Visual Studio Express Edition didn't become available until the 2005 series). Code::Blocks is a pretty good alternative and its updated installer package makes it a lot easier for beginners to use. However, it doesn't get updated frequently enough to compete with other well-established projects like Eclipse (not really for beginners, I know) and CodeLite. Regardless, I always suggest that someone who is uninsterested in cross-platform development and is a Windows user should use Visual Studio Express Edition. It's (mostly) full featured despite a lack of a few resources, in particular those that power and professional users will [probably] never need. And, it's a great introduction to Visual Studio development so that should a beginner decide that they want to continue development moving to a full version of Visual Studio is pretty painless. There are always better alternatives to any software package and it often requires a bit of research to make a final decision. No matter which way you look at it, however, Dev-C++ is one package that should not be blindly linked to anymore when there are other much better solutions available. This is a fantastic blog post and one that I frequently link to whenver I’m asked about Dev-C++. I used Dev-C++ back in 2000 when it was still being updated and other freely available tools either were sub-bar (sorry, but the text-mode editors that came with GCC were severly limited when it came to the expectations of a GUI environment) or were non-existant (Visual Studio Express Edition didn’t become available until the 2005 series).

Code::Blocks is a pretty good alternative and its updated installer package makes it a lot easier for beginners to use. However, it doesn’t get updated frequently enough to compete with other well-established projects like Eclipse (not really for beginners, I know) and CodeLite.

Regardless, I always suggest that someone who is uninsterested in cross-platform development and is a Windows user should use Visual Studio Express Edition. It’s (mostly) full featured despite a lack of a few resources, in particular those that power and professional users will [probably] never need. And, it’s a great introduction to Visual Studio development so that should a beginner decide that they want to continue development moving to a full version of Visual Studio is pretty painless.

There are always better alternatives to any software package and it often requires a bit of research to make a final decision. No matter which way you look at it, however, Dev-C++ is one package that should not be blindly linked to anymore when there are other much better solutions available.

]]>