CptDondo wrote: > Dotan Cohen wrote: > >> I'm trying to learn C in the university! >> >> I don't really care where the program _can_ run, only that I can run >> it from within the IDE. We're learning pointers and arrays and >> recursive functions. We are not learning to build GUIs. So I can use >> whatever compiles ANSI C, so long as it compiles from within the IDE >> because I'll make five hundred small changes and I need to run after >> each change. >> > OK, that sort of makes sense.... > > But I doubt you'll have much luck finding anything like Turbo C IDE for > linux.... > > I used to use it quite a bit when it came out, but linux is just > different.... > > IIRC correctly, you have an edit window, a run window, and an error > window. > > Sort of like an editor, a shell running make and the resulting > executable, and possibly another shell running gdb... > > The problem is that most of us in linux land are too damn picky and > individualistic for a simple IDE to really gain popularity. > > I use kate for some projects due to its ability to collapse and expand > blocks of code. I use vi for quick changes. I use cat and less and > grep to scan files. Sometimes I use sed to make global changes. I use > gedit sometimes instead of kate. I use cross-compilers and different > versions of gcc. I use all sorts of stuff, and the collection of little > tools I have is far richer than any single IDE. And I can tile my > windows in X to look like an IDE, so what need have I for an IDE? > > So I doubt you'll find an IDE similar to Turbo C.... The only time you > may find an IDE useful is for really complex tasks like dealing with Qt > (yeccchhhh). Try Eclipse with the CDT plugin. Might be easier than running an IDE with WINE. - Jörg _______________________________________________ wine-users mailing list wine-users@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.winehq.org/mailman/listinfo/wine-users
