[cfe-dev] LLVM, Clang Development IDEs

[mats petersson via cfe-dev]

Technically, I'm not an LLVM or Clang developer [by which I mean, I'm not
contributing code to LLVM or Clang, although I do have a patch for clang
that may make it in at some point], but I do use Emacs with cscope.

I'm not trying to start a war with Renato about "vi(m) vs (x)emacs" - it's
pointless, it's just one of those choices one makes at some point in life -
once you know enough to do things with ease in one, you end up not liking
the other. I have been using emacs, more or less continuously, for the past
32 years, and although I have professionally used both Eclipse and Visual
Studio - and they are competent and good tools, I find myself, at least on
Linux, always falling back to some variant of Emacs, because I know how to
do things there. I'm sufficiently damaged that I type ESC+w to copy text in
the browser - which of course doesn't work... :(

--
Mats

On 9 September 2015 at 14:19, Renato Golin via cfe-dev <
cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> On 9 September 2015 at 13:47, Keith Smith via cfe-dev
> <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> > I'm used to using Eclipse CDT as an IDE for C/C++ projects.
>
> Eclipse works ok on Linux, with nice code browsing and navigation
> tools. I also recommend Mylyn, if you go down that path.
>
> But the GDB integration, general speed and the memory usage is sub-par.
>
> Since CDT never really took off, and other Java IDEs are better
> (IntelliJ, for instance), I think Eclipse is doomed to be slowly
> forgotten over the years, just like Cobol and Java.
>
> I tried Code Blocks, KDevelop and Sublime, none of them good enough
> for a large and specialised project like LLVM (they either require
> their own build system integration, or they have no idea what's a
> build system). They also had really poor code navigation tools, so
> they all scored less than Eclipse, which is saying something!
>
> I also tried Emacs to stop the nagging from some colleagues, but after
> a few weeks, my fingers were hurting, and I hadn't been able to make
> it into an easier and more competent environment than vim.
>
> In the end, I went back to vim and I'm happy again.
>
>
> > What IDEs do llvm and clang developers use on Linux?
>
> <flame> *real* developers use vim </flame> :D
>
> With clang-complete, clang-check and clang-format added to vim, and
> plugins like vim-project, ctrlp and nerd tree, there is no reason to
> use any heavier editor. GDB has a TUI mode, which is really helpful
> and a lot more stable than most IDEs integration layers. What sets vim
> apart from others like Emacs, at least for me, is that I can reliably
> edit remote files using sshfs, and there is no noticeable slow down,
> while all other editors suffer and die constantly in those situations.
>
> cheers,
> --renato
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20150909/7eb55185/attachment.html>