Need advice on an IDE for autotools and C++

[Kevin O'Gorman]

On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 2:56 AM, James Freer <jessejazza3.uk at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 1 Sep 2012, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 1:45 AM, James Freer <jessejazza3.uk at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, 1 Sep 2012, John D Lamb wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 01/09/12 03:37, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a project that I dropped 10 years ago or so, and now that I'm
>>>>> retired I want to go back to it.
>>>>>
>>>>> I want it to use autotools, and the existing code is C++.  I was never
>>>>> really expert in either one.  I don't expect to become so.  I'm hoping
>>>>> to muddle through with the help of some IDE or other.  I could use
>>>>> suggestions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anybody know a good one?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I use emacs. But I suspect it’s not really an IDE in the sense you are
>>>> thinking of.
>>>>
>>>> Try eclipse. It’s well developed and incorporates debugging facilities.
>>>> I haven’t checked if you can substitute ‘make’ for g++, which is what
>>>> you need for autotools. I’d be surprised if you can’t.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> John D Lamb
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bluefish? Mature app receiving constant development. I'm learning emacs
>>> as i
>>> wnat to use one app for most of my needs but it's a learning curve.
>>> Bluefish
>>> is straight forward and could well be to your liking.
>>
>>
>> Bluefish?  It bills itself as an HTML editor, not an IDE.  Has
>> something changed?
>>
>> --
>> Kevin O'Gorman
>
>
> Sorry my mistake perhaps depending on how one's categorising an IDE. Nano is
> called an IDE in one place - i'd say it isn't. As an easy to use editor i'd
> call Bluefish one as it's such a competent editor... if that's to your
> taste.
>
> Why use an IDE as the code produced often isn't what one would like - thus
> use a well tried and tested programmer editor like vim or emacs. I've
> started using emacs for my word editing for several magazines i write for
> which emacs is an ideal tool - the screen conveniently increments a 1/2
> which is exceptionally useful. Only other editor to do that i know is pico.
>
> Ok i'm wrong.
>
> james

Editor wars are pointless.  I use vim not so much because I think it's
superior but because I started with vi about 1984, know it well, and
only want to know one editor. Since it is programmable too, you can
expect every neat thing other editors have out of the box has been
imitated somehow in Vim.  But half-screen adjustments were there in
the beginning via  control-D and control-U.

Bluefish is designed for editing HTML, and adds nothing to the
code-generation process.
Nano is a really cool but minimalist editor.

I was hoping for some of the features of Kdevelop, including help with
autotools.  But KDE has been too chaotic for me, and I gave up on it
at KDE 4.  Too much software gets broken by the updates, so I don't
trust their development discipline.

-- 
Kevin O'Gorman

programmer, n. an organism that transmutes caffeine into software.