On 18 September 2013 00:40, Dicebot <public@dicebot.lv> wrote:

> On Tuesday, 17 September 2013 at 14:20:03 UTC, Manu wrote:
>
>> Can any linux MonoDevelop user enlighten me on how to use MonoDevelop4 on linux? I couldn't find a package for it anywhere... only MD3. It seems linux MD is way behind... no idea why.
>>
>
> Your distro? It is 4.0.12 in Arch Linux official repository :P
>

Mint15... Link me? I can't find it.

On Wednesday, 18 September 2013 at 00:47:09 UTC, Manu wrote:
> Mint15... Link me? I can't find it.

Mint is Debian/Ubuntu based so you should look at PPA mentioned above:

> If you're on some sort of ubuntu variant: https://launchpad.net/~keks9n/+archive/monodevelop-latest

On 18 September 2013 14:09, Dicebot <public@dicebot.lv> wrote:

> On Wednesday, 18 September 2013 at 00:47:09 UTC, Manu wrote:
>
>> Mint15... Link me? I can't find it.
>>
>
> Mint is Debian/Ubuntu based so you should look at PPA mentioned above:


That looks thoroughly unofficial. Why should I trust it? MonoDevelop's website points to badgerports which is thoroughly out of date: http://monodevelop.com/Download

My friend also found this: http://software.opensuse.org/download/package?project=home:tpokorra:mono&package=monodevelop-opt

I'm not sure what to trust if I can't even trust the official website...

 If you're on some sort of ubuntu variant: https://launchpad.net/~keks9n/**
>> +archive/monodevelop-latest<https://launchpad.net/~keks9n/+archive/monodevelop-latest>
>>
>

On Wednesday, 18 September 2013 at 00:45:58 UTC, Manu wrote:
> On 18 September 2013 00:35, Joseph Rushton Wakeling <
> joseph.wakeling@webdrake.net> wrote:
>
>> On 17/09/13 16:19, Manu wrote:
>>
>>> I had some experience with kdevelop this past weekend trying to find a
>>> reasonable working environment on linux. It's fairly nice. Certainly come
>>> along
>>> since I last tried to take it seriously a year or 2 back.
>>> It would be nice if there was D support though. It has rudimentary
>>> support that
>>> some whipped up, but it could do a lot better.
>>>
>>
>> Do you have any experience/opinion on Qt Creator as an IDE?  My impression
>> is that it's nice in and of itself but limited compared to others in the
>> range of languages/tools it supports -- but it's a very superficial
>> impression so may be wrong.
>>
>
> The extent of my experience with QtCreator is that it has a button
> "Generate VS Project" in the menu, which I clicked on, and then I opened
> visual studio.
> For the few moments that I used it, I was surprised by now un-like-eclipse
> it looked :)
> Maybe it's decent? What's it's underlying project/build system?
> I have ex-trolltech mates who are now all unemployed... so what's the
> future of the tool?

It is the official IDE for Qt development, so I guess while Digia has customers it will be developed.

On Tuesday, 17 September 2013 at 15:15:09 UTC, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
> On 17/09/2013 15:19, Manu wrote:
>> On 17 September 2013 23:46, Bruno Medeiros
>> <brunodomedeiros+dng@gmail.com <mailto:brunodomedeiros+dng@gmail.com>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>    On 17/09/2013 07:24, Manu wrote:
>>
>>
>>                 I closed about half my open tabs after my last email
>>        (~50 left
>>                 open). Down
>>                 to 93mb. You must all use some heavy plugins or something.
>>                 My current solution has 10 projects, one is an entire game
>>                 engine with over
>>                 500 source files, hundreds of thousands of LOC.
>>        Intellisense
>>                 info for all
>>                 of it... dunno what to tell you.
>>                 Eclipse uses more than 4 times that much memory idling
>>        with no
>>                 project open
>>                 at all...
>>
>>
>>             4 times ? You must have a pretty light instance of eclipse !
>>
>>
>>        It's a fairly fresh eclipse install, and I just boot it up. It
>>        showed
>>        the home screen, no project loaded. It was doing absolutely
>>        nothing and
>>        well into 400mb.
>>        When I do use it for android and appengine, it more or less
>>        works well
>>        enough, but the UI feels like it's held together with stickytape and
>>        glue, and it's pretty sluggish. Debugging (native code) is slow and
>>        clunky. How can I take that software seriously?
>>        I probably waste significant portion of my life hovering and
>>        waiting for
>>        eclipse to render the pop-up variable inspection windows. That shit
>>        needs to be instant, no excuse. It's just showing a value from ram.
>>        Then I press a key, it doesn't take ages for the letter to
>>        appear on the
>>        screen...
>>
>>
>>    Android and Appengine?
>>    There are two flaws in that comparison, the first is that apparently
>>    you are comparing an Eclipse installation with a lot more tools than
>>    your VS installation (which I'm guessing has only C++ tools, perhaps
>>    some VCS tools too?). No wonder the footprint is bigger. For
>>    example, my Eclipse instance with only DDT and Git installed, and
>>    opened on a workspace with D projects takes up 130Mb:
>>    http://i.imgur..com/VmKzrRU.png <http://i.imgur.com/VmKzrRU.png>
>>
>>
>> My VS installation has VisualD, VCS tools, xbox 360, ps3, android,
>> emsscripten, nacl, clang and gcc tools. (I don't think these offer any
>> significant resource burden though, they're not really active processes)
>> If Eclipse has a lot more tools as you say, then it's a problem is that
>> I never selected them, and apparently they hog resources even when not
>> being used. That seems like a serious engineering fail if that's the case.
>> As far as I know, I don't have DDT and git installed, so you're 2 up on
>> me :) .. I only have android beyond default install (and no project was
>> open). No appengine in this installation.
>>
>
> Eclipse is designed such that plugins should be lazy-loaded: they are only loaded when needed (for example if you open a view/editor/preference-page/project, etc., contributed from a plugin). But that requires the plugin to be well-behaved in that regards, and some plugins might not be so.
> I'm not familiar at all with the Eclipse Android plugins or AppEngine plugins so I have no idea how these behave performance wise. I can't comment on that. Again it should noted that Eclipse is not a monolithic application, and a lot of things are going to depend on what plugins/tools you have installed. (neither is VisualStudio a monolithic application, but I would argue that Eclipse has more plugins and extensions available, and thus more variation in setup and quality of installations)
>
>
>>    With the recommend JVM memory settings (see
>>    http://code.google.com/p/ddt/__wiki/UserGuide#Eclipse_basics
>>    <http://code.google.com/p/ddt/wiki/UserGuide#Eclipse_basics> ), the
>>    usage in that startup scenario goes up to 180Mb.
>>    But even so that is not a fair comparison, the second flaw here is
>>    that Eclipse is running on a VM, and is not actually using all the
>>    memory that is taken from the OS.
>>
>>
>> It's perfectly fair. Let's assume for a second that I couldn't care less
>> that it runs in a VM (I couldn't), all you're really saying is that VM's
>> are effectively a waste of memory and performance, and that doesn't
>> redeem Eclipse in any way.
>> You're really just suggesting that Eclipse may be inherently inefficient
>> because it's lynched by it's VM. So there's no salvation for it? :)
>>
>>    If you wanna see how much memory the Java application itself is
>>    using for its data structures, you have to use a tool like jconsole
>>    (included in the JDK) to check out JVM stats. For example, in the
>>    DDT scenario above, after startup the whole of Eclipse is just using
>>    just 40Mb for the Java heap:
>>    http://i.imgur..com/yCPtS52.png <http://i.imgur.com/yCPtS52.png>
>>
>>
>> I don't care how much memory the app is 'really' using beneath it's
>> overhead. All I care about is how much memory it's using (actually, I
>> don't really care about that at all, I only care about how it performs,
>> which is poorly), and the windows task manager surely offers the most
>> fair measure for comparison available to the OS, at least for the memory
>> consumption metric ;) ..
>
> The Java VM overhead is a valid overhead, I'm not dismissing it entirely. But looking back on your comments, it appears you are implying that if your Eclipse installation takes up 400Mb of process memory in the Windows Task Manager, with an empty workspace, then if you had a workspace of the same size as you have in VisualStudio ("solution has 10 projects", etc.) then Eclipse memory usage would just explode. But that is not a fair measure:
> The VM overhead is linear to the size of the plugins of your Eclipse installation. It's not gonna grow in proportion to the data you have on your workspace though. Only the Java heap of Eclipse would be expected to grow in proportion to the Eclipse workspace size. That's why I was pointing out the Java heap memory usage.
>
>> The problem remains that I find eclipse
>> significantly less responsive, and the UI is messy and disorganised. I
>> feel a lack of coherency between different parts of Eclipse.
>> So in summary, I prefer and use VS whenever I have the option.
>>
>
> That said, I do agree that Eclipse is generally slower than Visual Studio. Eclipse (and most existing plugins) are almost entirely Java-based, which has some JIT and GC overheards. Whereas VS is done in C++ and C# (I'm guessing a lot of critical bits are developed in C++, at least for VS2010).
> But I don't think Eclipse is as bad or as slow as a lot of people make it appear to be. And better functionality would make up for it, for sure.

It is mostly C# actually.

The VS 2010 rewrite was a way to fix WPF bugs and prove the developers at large that big applications could be done in WPF.

As far as I can tell from MSDN blogs, the only C++ bits left standing were the ones related to C++ development.

This most likely changed with the whole "Going Native" story afterwards.

--
Paulo

On 18 September 2013 17:45, PauloPinto <pjmlp@progtools.org> wrote:

>
> It is mostly C# actually.
>
> The VS 2010 rewrite was a way to fix WPF bugs and prove the developers at large that big applications could be done in WPF.
>
> As far as I can tell from MSDN blogs, the only C++ bits left standing were the ones related to C++ development.
>
> This most likely changed with the whole "Going Native" story afterwards.
>

It's clear that MS have no idea WTF they're doing with VisualStudio, that's
been clear for half a decade... I'm just waiting for a viable alternative
to emerge.
Still nothing...

On 18/09/13 02:45, Manu wrote:
> The extent of my experience with QtCreator is that it has a button "Generate VS
> Project" in the menu, which I clicked on, and then I opened visual studio.
> For the few moments that I used it, I was surprised by now un-like-eclipse it
> looked :)
> Maybe it's decent? What's it's underlying project/build system?
> I have ex-trolltech mates who are now all unemployed... so what's the future of
> the tool?

I had the impression the future was very positive, ever since Digia acquired Qt from Nokia a couple of years back.

AFAIK it can use make, cmake or qmake as project build systems and can use GDB, CDB (Microsoft?) and Valgrind for debugging.  I don't have enough IDE experience to really make any judgement, but I wondered if it might meet your needs as a light, cross-platform IDE.

On Wednesday, 18 September 2013 at 07:59:43 UTC, Manu wrote:
> On 18 September 2013 17:45, PauloPinto <pjmlp@progtools.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> It is mostly C# actually.
>>
>> The VS 2010 rewrite was a way to fix WPF bugs and prove the developers at
>> large that big applications could be done in WPF.
>>
>> As far as I can tell from MSDN blogs, the only C++ bits left standing were
>> the ones related to C++ development.
>>
>> This most likely changed with the whole "Going Native" story afterwards.
>>
>
> It's clear that MS have no idea WTF they're doing with VisualStudio, that's
> been clear for half a decade... I'm just waiting for a viable alternative
> to emerge.
> Still nothing...

I think it is all very political what is driving them.

With Longhorn, there was the plan to make the OS .NET based, similar to how OS/400 works, and to certain extent Android and WP7 were done.

As Longhorn project was rebooted and Vista came out, whatever problems the teams were having with Longhorn rewrite of Win32 into .NET was attributed to the tooling.

As we all know in our jobs it is easier to blame tooling as the people.

As such the native tools group inside Microsoft felt empowered and started pushing into the back to native direction we see nowadays.

Even the WinRT runtime is nothing new, it was actually developed in 1999.

Microsoft Research proposed a language neutral COM runtime, which eventually became .NET instead.

http://blogs.msdn.com/cfs-file.ashx/__key/communityserver-components-postattachments/00-10-32-72-38/Ext_2D00_VOS.pdf

Full story here, http://blogs.msdn.com/b/dsyme/archive/2012/07/05/more-c-net-generics-history-the-msr-white-paper-from-mid-1999.aspx

I have no idea how far or close from the truth this is, but it is my gut feeling how these events developed themselves.

Typical enterprise political games, which affect everyone that wants to target Windows as well.

--
Paulo

On 18 September 2013 19:44, Joseph Rushton Wakeling < joseph.wakeling@webdrake.net> wrote:

> On 18/09/13 02:45, Manu wrote:
>
>> The extent of my experience with QtCreator is that it has a button
>> "Generate VS
>> Project" in the menu, which I clicked on, and then I opened visual studio.
>> For the few moments that I used it, I was surprised by now
>> un-like-eclipse it
>> looked :)
>> Maybe it's decent? What's it's underlying project/build system?
>> I have ex-trolltech mates who are now all unemployed... so what's the
>> future of
>> the tool?
>>
>
> I had the impression the future was very positive, ever since Digia acquired Qt from Nokia a couple of years back.
>
> AFAIK it can use make, cmake or qmake as project build systems and can use GDB, CDB (Microsoft?) and Valgrind for debugging.  I don't have enough IDE experience to really make any judgement, but I wondered if it might meet your needs as a light, cross-platform IDE.
>

The problem I've always had with make-based build systems is rebuild dependencies... how do any of those build systems go performing a minimal rebuild, or incremental linking?

On 18 September 2013 21:45, Manu <turkeyman@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 18 September 2013 19:44, Joseph Rushton Wakeling < joseph.wakeling@webdrake.net> wrote:
>
>> On 18/09/13 02:45, Manu wrote:
>>
>>> The extent of my experience with QtCreator is that it has a button
>>> "Generate VS
>>> Project" in the menu, which I clicked on, and then I opened visual
>>> studio.
>>> For the few moments that I used it, I was surprised by now
>>> un-like-eclipse it
>>> looked :)
>>> Maybe it's decent? What's it's underlying project/build system?
>>> I have ex-trolltech mates who are now all unemployed... so what's the
>>> future of
>>> the tool?
>>>
>>
>> I had the impression the future was very positive, ever since Digia acquired Qt from Nokia a couple of years back.
>>
>> AFAIK it can use make, cmake or qmake as project build systems and can use GDB, CDB (Microsoft?) and Valgrind for debugging.  I don't have enough IDE experience to really make any judgement, but I wondered if it might meet your needs as a light, cross-platform IDE.
>>
>
> The problem I've always had with make-based build systems is rebuild dependencies... how do any of those build systems go performing a minimal rebuild, or incremental linking?
>

And of course their edit-and-continue support to update a binary while debugging and continue debugging the edited binary with your code tweak (an extension from incremental linking)...