Le samedi 22 décembre 2018 à 17:13 +0100, André Hartmann a écrit :
> Hi Alexis,
>
> > I was wondering if this would be totally stupid to have a mode in
> QTC
> > were we could code in a single source with no Build System setup?
> [...]
> > is so convenient to just start writing code without any setup.
>
> Sounds good.
>
> > But this has many drawbacks like, no or almost no completion, no
> debug
> > and needs internet.
>
> So may I ask what your goal is? Is it:
>
> * Proof that your code compiles?
It depends what you mean here, it can be to check "can I write
this?" like "is auto here allowed?" Sometime also it is also good
to be able to check if feature X works on compiler Y.
> * Run a small (console) application?
nope
> * Look at the generated assembly output?
sometime to check what is evaluated at build time
-> usually this is more to focus on a smaller and simpler code to solve
some problems.For example I was working on this library:
https://github.com/jeandet/TimeSeries/blob/master/include/TimeSeries.hI
had to test few things alone (to avoid brain overheat ;)) like - how
to use CRTP to compose classes with abstract behaviours - how to
make a custom iterator which yield a fake value
To be more general, when I face an issue and feel that my code is too
big to reason about something, I just extract the few classes I want to
focus on and work on Coliru.Or also before I start something I do some
tests on coliru if I'm not sure the concept works.
> In principle, one could think of a "scratch" wizard, that
>
> * Creates a project with a unique name like
> "QTC-Scatch-2018-12-22-17-08"
> * Uses qmake as build system
> * Uses the default "desktop" kit with it's Qt version
> and compiler
> * Adds a main.cpp and opens it in the editor
>
> You could than choose other compilers through the usual Projects
> mode,
> build, run and debug your project. Other compiler options could be
> set
> in the Project .pro file.
>
> That would reduce the setup to two or three clicks and looks simple
> enough to be integrated without big effort.
>
> What do you think?
Yes that would definitely speed up things and guess this wouldn't ask
too much work.In the future that would be awesome to get closer to
Coliru and Godblot; get rid of qmake and just set the cpp compiler in a
drop down menu.The issue with QTC is that you can only switch between
kits. Being able to just switch the compiler from the editor would be
nice allow to both check compiler capability and sometime get better
error messages.
> Best regards,André
>
> Am 22.12.18 um 12:12 schrieb Jeandet Alexis:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I was wondering if this would be totally stupid to have a mode in
> > QTC
> > were we could code in a single source with no Build System setup?
> > I always go to websites like coliru, godbolt, wandbox,... to do
> > some
> > tests(test concepts, see if I can template something,...) because
> > this
> > is so convenient to just start writing code without any setup. But
> > this
> > has many drawbacks like, no or almost no completion, no debug and
> > needs
> > internet.
> >
> > In QTC I would easily see a section in welcome page "scratch-pad"
> > with
> > previous ones and a button to create a new one. I don't think we
> > should
> > care about file location or any setup, source files could be stored
> > in
> > QTC user data folder. Maybe we could just switch among available
> > compilers and set manually compile args like godbolt.
> >
> > Am I the only one who miss this feature?
> > If no I will definitely open a BR.
> >
> > Best regards and happy holidays,
> > Alexis.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Qt-creator mailing list
> > Qt-creator@qt-project.org
> > https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/qt-creator
> >
_______________________________________________
Qt-creator mailing list
Qt-creator@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/qt-creator
