Re: c/c++ project management and debugging

[Andrea Crotti]

Elena <egarrulo@gmail.com> writes:

>
> That's what I was talking about: makefiles are akin to assembly
> language, with shell commands being the corresponding machine-
> language.  You should be "compiling" an higher-level language (that
> is, a language which understands projects: CMake, etc.) to makefiles.
>

Never said you shouldn't, but you'd better understand at least how those
higher level things work, otherwise you're just playing with black
boxes.

> That's the problem: every Emacs power user seems to be chasing this
> holy grail of a greatly customized Emacs, but I have yet to see a
> customized Emacs matching a customized IDE.

I've never seen instead an IDE which doesn't suck/eat all my memory for
doing nothing/is bloated of useless things and I never find what I
really need, but that's maybe my problem :D
>
> That's their fault, not their IDE's.  Comparing an heavily customized
> Emacs to a vanilla IDE is not fair.  Moreover, I can edit the same
> source file both in Emacs and Visual Studio, and each side is just an
> hot-key away.  I use each tool for its intended purpose: the text-
> editor (Emacs) to edit text, the code-editor (IDE) to edit code.

If you know enough elisp and bash scripting I really don't see what an
IDE can do better (apart from maybe for java).

Do you have things like
yasnippet/auto-complete/flyspell-prog-mode/org-mode on your wonderful
IDE?

Any IDE is not easy to customize and work better for some languages
only, I really don't see any advantage in using them.

I remember when I tried to have a better color theme on eclipse, there
is NO support for that, you have to substitute some files with some
xml-like syntax with other files.

This was only the first annoying thing I found before I closed it
(hopefully) forever...