On 01/19/2017 08:38 PM, Evan Koblentz via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
What's a good graphical C for Linux? I'd rather avoid the command line. I know how to use it modestly enough, but I don't enjoy it.
Nearly all of the world's C compilers, past and current, are command line systems. And nearly all of them are actually GCC under the covers, for everything even remotely modern. I've gotten pushback from lots of people in the past after having made those statements, and they point to stuff like Eclipse, MPLab, etc. Those, and nearly all others, are just GUIs wrapped around standard command-line GCC. So in your case it boils down to finding an IDE that you like. I personally recommend avoiding them entirely, as they deprive you of most of the flexibility and control. (they also tend to be huge lumbering pigs resource-wise) IDEs are very generally for the lazy folks who ask questions like "What do I click to make a program?" Unfortunately that's 95% of the developers out there today. Some say there's nothing wrong with that, but there actually is quite a lot wrong with it. I cut the size of the resultant binary down by almost 80% by ditching an IDE in a product whose firmware I inherited several years ago. The code size was important not only because the program memory space on the processor was nearly full and they wanted additional features, but also because the firmware updates were (and are) sent out via the cellular data network. Until I fixed it, a global firmware update cost about $20,000 to $22,000. Now it's about $3,500 due to the reduced binary size. Why? The IDE isolated the programmers from full control of the compiler and its code generation options. In other words, they discovered "what to click to make a program", and clicked it. Without learning a damn thing about what they were actually doing. But I digress. You get the point. -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA