I'm very disappointed with c++ builder intellisense, so I'm wonder is there any good intellisense that can be used in c++ builder? Something like visual studio have "Visual assist". My current version of builder is 2010, is the x2 have better intellisense?
I doubt if there is a good C++ compiler...
Code Blocks allows the user to hide all the text within an opening brace and a closing brace.
DevC++ can only give colors to different stuff. And it's really old. I used to use it when I was learning C++ at school.
MS Visual C++ allows the user to hide all the text within a function or class and comments that are longer than one line. This is my personal favorite. But it's a bit heavy for old systems (like my 5 year-old laptop).
If I were you, I'd start testing any compiler I find for some time. This way you can see which one mostly suits you.
Related
Does anyone know if the code editor used by VSTO IDE is available to use in my own projects?
I need to use a code editor in my project. I Googled to try to find one, but I found several third party solutions (pay or free) but they don't fit my needs.
In same way as Webbrowser control, is the "sourcecodeeditor" control of VSTO available to use as a project component?
In same way as Webbrowser control, is the "sourcecodeeditor" control of VSTO available to use as a project component?
[. . .]
Exists the class "MSVSTOSourceCodeEditor"? This is the question. Thanks
Unfortunately, no. Microsoft doesn't allow you to subclass its source code editor, nor do they provide a version for use in your own projects. As I mentioned before, they don't really want to encourage you to rewrite Visual Studio. They'd prefer that you bought it instead!
Have you considered creating a plug-in or extension for Visual Studio instead? It's a little bit different way of going about it, but it just might work for you. Your developers might find it more convenient since they won't have to switch back and forth between two programs.
If you're really set on rolling your own custom solution, probably the best thing to do is check the source code for some of the open-source, Visual Studio-style IDEs, and see how they've written the code editor:
MonoDevelop
SharpDevelop
KDevelop
I am trying to identify the point in time where code completion (autocomplete/intellisense/whatever) was first introduced in IDEs and would appreciate any pointers.
By code completion here I mean a feature within the editor that suggests methods or functions based on the code that was already typed, and I am interested in programming language related completions (not word processor style completion).
I remember seeing it in Visual Studio and Microsoft Office in the early-nineties, and I don't remember at what point it was introduced, or whether it was actually available in DOS-based IDEs like Turbo Pascal or Turbo C++. On a hunch, I would guess that this was probably introduced in Smalltalk.
For those wondering, I need this information for a research paper and wasn't able to find a credible answer online.
The first IDE that comes on my mind is the IDE of Visual Basic
The Wikipedia article on IntelliSense has a history section and indicates that the first use was in 1996.
VB, Smalltalk, Emacs, Think Pascal, Sun's Forte.
Maybe it worked in some of the early Xerox stuff who knows.
I am quite sure Turbo Pascal had some of these features, and that was even before Windows existed.
Turbo Pascal had auto-indent (woo!) but nothing you'd call auto-complete I don't think.
The first time I ever witnessed auto-complete was circa 1985. It was another pascal development system, with a strange name—maybe it was Alice—at any rate I think it was a woman's name. The editor did auto-indent, auto-completion of control structures (no more typing BEGIN and END), and even some form of syntax coloring. It might have been the first time I saw colors in a code editor.
The screen was stunning! Bland code was suddenly vibrant.
Alas, the product disappeared pretty quick. It was real buggy and drove everybody nuts. It seemed like nothing like it showed up until many years after that.
Edit: It was indeed called Alice, by Looking Glass Software, and I found some info on it here.
We are in the process of creating active-x controls used within our application.
Since Microsoft stopped supporting classic Visual Basic, is it wise to use Visual Basic to develop the Active X control or the latest VC++/ATL/MFC libraries provide more feature where we can create controls faster by leaving Visual Basic flexibility?
We will not be able to use .NET/VB.NET/C# since the application is supposed to work inside containers and containers may not support latest .NET runtime.
Any other language is best fit for Active X control development other than VB and VC++?
I, personally, would recommend using Delphi for this. It is still actively developed, and has the control you get with C++, but a rapid development environment more like VB.NET.
#nobugz: If you are really interested what is ActiveX in Delphi, look at docwiki. Normally it is 100% source code (yours + VCL, VCL is also available as sources) with autogenerated COM wrappers. So all potential security problems are also in source code. If you find a security problem in VCL, please send a bug report to Quality Central.
Here is a good example on how to create ActiveX Controls with C# .NET
http://www.codeproject.com/KB/cs/CreateActiveXDotNet.aspx
By all means VB6 is the best language. After reading your question I feel that you are a VB6 developer. If you know VB6 and use it then why hesitate using it for producing ActiveX controls.
I program in Delphi as well as VB6 along with VB.NET and C# but creating ActiveX controls is the easiest in VB6 compares to all other development tools.
If you are hell bent on not using VB and if you are looking for an alternative then try out PowerBasic (commercial - very costly) or PureBasic (commercial but affordable) Get it from here or better still MinGW (a GNU C++ compiler).
I have to say that VB6 with a good book like Developing COM/ActiveX Components with VB6: A Guide to the Perplexed you will be up and running faster.
see also VB.NET Static Code Anaylsis
For better or for worst we now have a VB.NET coding standards document that is based on a C# coding standard as enforced by StyleCop.
For example
the number of spaces you should put in each side of a “+” sign etc
all instance Members (fields and methods!) must be access as “me.fieldName”
all shared members must be accessed as “className.fieldName”
As I tend to think:
If it’s in a requirements document it
should be check for by an automatic
system
I am looking for (ideally free) tools that will check for that short of rules on VB.NET code, as these are style issues that don’t make it into the compiled output, FxCop is not useful.
(I would personally match rather that we just check for important things like duplicated code and single reasonability for each class (so no more multi thousand line classes!), but as I need to keep to the coding standard document I wish to have a tool to help me do so.)
see also Enforcing using the class name whenever a shared member is accessed.
About the bounty.
I am looking for a list of VB.NET code checking tools, with a short summery of what each tool can do and its limitations. If the tools are not free, please include some ideal of cost.
Does anyone have experience using CodeRush/Refactor! or ReSharper with VB.NET to check for this type of coding style issues?
I know of no free source code analysis tools with good VB support. There are, however, at least two commercial tools that may be suitable:
submain CodeIt.Right
SSW Code Auditor
Personally, I prefer the CodeIt.Right rule authoring mechanism, so I would favour it if considerable custom rule development were planned. However, if you just want to use out-of-the box rules, Code Auditor ships with quite a few more code style rules than CodeIt.Right, most of whose built-in rules target the compiled IL (like FxCop).
The only ones I know of are:
Microsoft's FxCop
Of course, this only operates on compiled assemblies, so doesn't give the same functionality as StyleCop, and certainly won't help with things like naming schemes.
However, the closest thing is:
Aivosto's Project Analyzer v9.0 for Visual Basic, VB.NET and VBA
The full version is not free, but this is the closest thing to StyleCop for VB.NET that I can find.
There have been a number of calls for a VB.NET version of Microsoft's StyleCop, such as those in this thread on the code.msdn.microsoft.com site. That same thread also gives some good insight into why a VB.NET version doesn't exist.
I use ReSharper on a daily basis and I find it fine for both code formatting and for solving naming issues. It allows to configure how naming must be enforced, how issues are displayed (hint, suggestion, warning, etc) and provides a precise code formatter (space, paranthesis, line breaks, this qualifier, etc).
Note that I don't know if it can be run in batch mode.
Turning Option Explicit on by default is always a great idea and should be standard practice. I would argue it should be turned on by default in VS out of the box. But it doesn't come close to enforcing the out of the box rules that StyleCop does for C#, nor does it allow for you to create your own rules.
The whole reason for StyleCop's existence is because FxCop only works on compiled assemblies, leaving web projects out in the cold for a similar tool. With StyleCop, web developers get the same great rule enforcement and tight VS integration. It is a great tool for any C# developer.
It is unfortunate that it is only C# capable, a VB version would satisfy a large community that is left wanting something similar.
There already is a very good style tool built into the VB compiler. It is called Option Explicit On, put it at the top of the source code file or use Tools + Options + Project and Solutions + VB Defaults, Option Explicit = On. If that wasn't turned on previously there could be a mountain of errors when you compile your code after changing that.
If it is clean or already turned on, consider that you are 95% close to writing clean C# code and that the language doesn't really matter anymore.
Does anyone know of an alternative IDE for Sybase Powerbuilder? It feels pretty clunky, after working with VS2008 and Eclipse.
If not, has anyone successfully worked with this language outside the IDE? I'm not against using a simple text editor, but I find edit-import-regenerate-test-export-edit is clunkier than simply using the Powerbuilder editor.
To date, the only tools I have had any success with are:
PowerGen, for builds (with NUnit and CruiseControl.NET)
ConTEXT, which has syntax highlighting for Powerbuilder
PBL Peeper, which has some interesting features not present in the IDE
EDIT: I added a bounty to draw some wider attention to the question. It would be a very nice thing to have, if it exists.
EDIT: Well that was disappointing. The bounty apparently did not cause even 1 new person to look at the question.
None that I'm aware of, although you could probably use a source control tool, edit in your source control repository, and Get Latest Version from the PB IDE to shorten your text editor cycle. Be warned that there are hacks required to edit anything over 128 ASCII. (My guess is that this is to allow everything Unicode to be source controlled in the most restrictive source control tools.)
As Paul said, PB12 is coming with based on the Visual Studio shell, and will include things like collapsible code blocks, Intellisense, etc.... However, for PB12, this will only be used for WPF targets and a few .NET-type targets (like assemblies), last I heard. Win32 targets will continue to use the "classic" IDE.
Good luck,
Terry.
P.S. Thanks for the PBL Peeper compliment.
The PowerBuilder IDE is clunky, but I don't think developing completely outside the PowerBuilder IDE is a good idea. I think there are just too many dependencies right now.
However, the IDE for PowerBuilder 12 will be built using Microsoft's Visual Studio Isolated Shell so it ought to be much better when that is released. Also, I believe they'll be doing away with the PBL format which ought to make source control much easier to work with.
Certainly something to watch.
What I do is right-click the object and edit source. Then I copy the text and paste it into Notepad++ to edit. I copy and paste back to PowerBuilder, then I can save and see any errors. I've got a fairly decent User Defined Language for PowerScript if anyone's interested.
Added:
Please be aware that I've seen the PB Source editor corrupt DataWindows. They were all large DataWindows. To be safe always export DataWindows to edit.
One tool that will most probably make your PB experience way better is Visual Expert, which provides a good source browser. Such a tool should have been integrated into the PB IDE a long time ago, IMHO. Only problem is that it's not free, as opposed to the other tools you mention.
Regarding using external source editors, you can probably take advantage of OrcaScript, which is a scripting language that lets you perform actions such as export and import of PB objects from outside of the IDE. It will require some effort, but you can setup a basic dev env using batch files with ORCA scripts and some additional external tools. However, this setup will lack any visual editing capabilities, which means no (feasible) GUI or DW work. If you're mostly into NVOs, it could work. But then if that's the case, why use PB in the first place?...
I too have heard PB12's use of VS will be limited to some .NET stuff, which will probably benefit only a very small portion of the PB programmers community. I'm afraid the rest of us are stuck with the awful IDE for years to come.
Other than exporting the source and editing it I don't know of another IDE for PB. One problem you may have is that the exported source contains a lot of syntax that is not documented in the manuals. The PB IDE generates this code but there is no support for creating it by hand. I think you are stuck with the PB IDE
In my modest five Years of experiences starting with Powerbuilder 5/6, now using PB 10, I tempt to :
build my own browser from the classdefinition object based on Powerbuilder
tried to use autohotkey in order to open datawindows comfortable (we have several thousands in the project and i am two-finger-driven)
truly investigated in the idea using an external editor/IDE suppoted by an autohotkey script which is undermined by sybase allowing only mouse-click-usage of PB
using Visual Expert which is neither a truly integration in the IDE, nor is really worth in analyzing datwindow/powerscript interaction
ending by build hopes on PB12 Visual Studio, which lacks - depending on compatibility issues - ...
... i came to the conclusion that there will be no chance in improving Powerbuilder to an state-of-the-art language
In my philosophy - I obtained during those years - I distinguish between two types of OOP-oriented languages:
the one that award using object-orientation like C#, Python, Ruby (C++) etc. and very much the Java-Eclipse/Netbeans-Universe does
the other one that punish using object-orientation like Powerbuilder and the old Visual Basic, for example (which is causative the OOP-Idea comes afterwards and is "plugged in").
Especially the demand that all object should always be compiled (regenerated) and that you could't work with ancestors and descandants concurrently makes it painful to use real OOP.
...In memory of the good old Unix(Solaris)/C++ days...
I was researching a replacement solution that would be similar to PowerBuilder and I came across two that caught my eye.
The first was 'React Studio' https://reactstudio.com/ which I found via Alternativeto.net .
And the second was from an ad at the top of some Google searches but it was similar enough and looked good enough at first glance for me to want to take a closer look at it, and it's called 'Servoy' https://servoy.com/ .
Still researching but I currently have React Studio at the top of our list.
The TextPad editor has a syntax definition file for PowerBuilder 6.x contributed by anr#aon.at that I downloaded for free and customized several years ago. It works fine for later versions (including 8), doing keyword color highlighting on PowerScript srx files. Editing large source files in PB could get it to crash so it's usually safer, faster and more convenient to export to srx file, edit outside the IDE then re-import.