Thread: Codeblocks gets a new release

Code::Blocks is great, and I am excited to try out this new release. Although I really liked Code::Blocks v1.0 R2, I had a couple of issues with it. The debugger didn't seem to work very well. I couldn't seem to make it do anything - whereas Visual Studio's debugger is amazing. Does anyone else have any experience with Code::Block's debugger? I have yet to try using it in this new release.

Could that be related to the version of GDB used? The Netbeans installation instructions I followed said something about the current MinGW port of GDB being quirky, so it recommended a newer version. That might have been the problem with the version of GDB bundled with Code::Blocks 1.0 RC2. In my case I prefer my MinGW installation to be separate, so I pretty control what I have for my compiler toolchain.

A bit off topic, but does GCC support inline assembly for x64 yet? I'd switch to C::B if it did.

hmm... but why would that influence your decision, since you can use MSVC with Code::Blocks?

Originally Posted by abachler

A bit off topic, but does GCC support inline assembly for x64 yet? I'd switch to C::B if it did.

It "never hasn't" if that makes sense. - as in gcc has always supported x86_64 inline assembler since the first 3.x version of gcc that first had x86_64 support at all.

Since gcc is used to compile the Linux kernel, and the Linux kernel uses inline assembler, it is kind of critical to have this.

--
Mats

Oh, and I was wrong: Code::Blocks does have a strip trailing space feature. It is included and enabled by default under Settings -> Editor -> Strip trailing blanks.

I guess the only thing I find missing now that Netbeans has is lack of support for development in Java, but I guess I could live with more than one IDE

And yet you would have to set up the compile options to individual files and set them up individually. I know, I did it

Got quiet boring after a while. I don't think Java will ever be in their plans. I remember some thread on their forums some time ago where Mandrav or Thomas said exactly that.

Some support exist yes, but exists as a consequence of the open architecture of the IDE, not an actual effort to make it so. As such, some important details are left out.

In short, you can do it, but you won't like it.