Re: visual c++ equivalent

[Eric Scott <scottclansman@cwazy.co.uk>]

Micha Feigin wrote:

> At Wed, 08 Dec 2004 07:17:17 -0600,
> Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
>  
>
> > Kevin Mark wrote:
> >    
> >
> > > On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 04:51:19PM +0800, ms linux wrote:
> > >
> > >      
> > >
> > > > is there a free visual c++ equivalent in linux ?
> > > > searching so far I only found IBM XLC, but of course,
> > > > it's not free.
> > > >
> > > > thanks,
> > > >
> > > > --me--
> > > >
> > > >        
> > > Hi MS,
> > > well there are 3 things that make up vc++ from my perspective:
> > > a)c++ language
> > > b)gui toolkit
> > > c)debugging/ide tool
> > > point a is covered by the gcc collection (c,c++,fortran,...)
> > > point b is covered by any toolkit (gdk,tk,qt,...)
> > > point c can be covered by eclipse,gdb, and many others.
> > > -Kev
> > >      
> > Absolutely. Nothing beats plain gcc and Qt with gdb. I bought visual c++ 
> > in 1994. Was it a mess. It brought on the move to Linux.
> >
> >    
>
> And if you are interested even Microsoft themselves don't use visual. The whole
> tool chain for windows is command line (I think it is proprietary though).
>
>  

Scary... when Microsoft shys away from using their own product.......
But I suppose the real power in M$'s development platform is in the .NET 
classes, which are all just as accessible from the command-line compiler 
as the "F5" button in Visual Studio ;-).
          Cheerio,
              SigmaChi