On 2014-01-27 14:12, Manu wrote:
On 27 January 2014 22:14, Jacob Carlborg <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

    On 2014-01-27 09:11, Manu wrote:

        In order:

        1. A debugger (that works properly)
        2. Go-to definition (that always works)
        3. Auto-complete (that always works)


    How well do these work for you in Visual Studio for C++? I'm finding
    cases in Xcode where it doesn't always work, especially in DMD.


The VC debugger is perfect for C/C++. I can't imagine how it would be
improved. You can even edit your code and rebuild+relink while it's
running to make minor runtime tweaks, and continue execution using the
modified code.

Cool. I was mostly thinking of go-to definition and autocomplete. The debugger in Xcode has a couple of nice features as well. It support a bunch of value formatters, which are also customizable. Like if a value is an image (I assume NSImage) it will actually render the image.

Go-to definition is not perfect, but it works 95% of the time.
Auto-complete is very good in C/C++ but there are a few rough edges
(possibly from complex preprocessor mess?),

Xcode has some problems with the DMD source code. It seems quite random, when go-to definition fails or resolves to the wrong symbol. But most of the time it works. I would assume it works even better for Objective-C.

but C# is the clear benchmark for quality here.

Yeah, I remember Java in Eclipse. It's basically flawless.

D doesn't have a preprocessor or a horrible network of text include, it
should easily be able to match the C# experiences in general.

It does some other horrible things (from a source code analysis perspective, like template and string mixins.

I say 'that always works' above, implying that it sometimes works...
which is true, but it's in the realm of 30% for me, which is unreliable
enough to be very annoying. Any time 'class' appears in D, it all goes
south under VisualD.

I see.

--
/Jacob Carlborg

Reply via email to