Hi,

I'm trying to learn xcode... But I don't like it as much as visual
studio, because there are a couple of things which are really not
logical I think...

1) For instance: When I debug using this "memory dump view", the numbers
doesn't change to red when they're modified as in Visual studio - I
really like this, since it's much easier to keep track on what's changed.

2) I also have to manually indent my program code properly... That
really stinks... Or is it just me who missed something? I tried to mark
everything and go to "Format"-menu + "re-indent" and "balance"...
Nothing worked... Still looks ugly as hell... Perhaps I need to change
some options somewhere?

3) Take a look at this small program:


#include <iostream>
using namespace std;

class test
{
private:
int abc;

public:
test() : abc(911) {}

int& member_test()
{
return abc-11;
}

};


int main()
{
cout << endl << endl;

test c;

cout << "HI" << " test = " << c.member_test();

return 0;
}


Xcode doesn't even tell me the return value of the function, when I use
the debugger....! I would expect something like, when I put a breakpoint
and when c.member_test() is about to return (or just after it returned),
then the debugger variable window should tell me that: "c.member_test()
returned 900". But it doesn't!

The only way I can see what it returned is by watching what comes out on
the screen... That is unacceptable... I hoped there was another GUI
debugger/IDE available that can be recommended for mac os X, if these
issues can't be solved...

Could anyone help me with these 3 issues? There are also other things
which I hate with xcode, but perhaps I can learn to like it if somebody
here can learn me how to use it a bit better....

TIA.


Best regards / Med venlig hilsen
Martin Jørgensen

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Home of Martin Jørgensen - http://www.martinjoergensen.dk

Martin Jørgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to learn xcode... But I don't like it as much as visual
> studio, because there are a couple of things which are really not
> logical I think...
>
> 1) For instance: When I debug using this "memory dump view", the numbers
> doesn't change to red when they're modified as in Visual studio - I
> really like this, since it's much easier to keep track on what's changed.
>
> 2) I also have to manually indent my program code properly... That
> really stinks... Or is it just me who missed something? I tried to mark
> everything and go to "Format"-menu + "re-indent" and "balance"...
> Nothing worked... Still looks ugly as hell... Perhaps I need to change
> some options somewhere?

Unfortunately, i complete agree. XCode is a piece of junk. I doubt I
will take another Mac contract after the one I am on, as I hate to use
it. I feel like I have gone back in time 10 years or more.

I used to say that about the PC, but now with only XCode to use, the PC
is light years ahead.

Also, hover your cursor over a variable. VS tells you the value, but
XCode just stares back.

No support for 'active local variables'. Only the full set. Usually
what I want is inside 'self' so I have to open that, seeing a very long
list with only maybe 5 or 10 relevant to the code block I am in. VS is
very smart about that (while letting you see all variables if you
prefer).

Lots of other limitations too. I am basically debugging with printf
again (NSLog in this case, but same beast). I haven't had to do that in
well over a decade. :-(

--
- Burt Johnson
MindStorm, Inc.
http://www.mindstorm-inc.com/software.html

Burt Johnson wrote:
> Martin Jørgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:
-snip-

> Also, hover your cursor over a variable. VS tells you the value, but
> XCode just stares back.

I really can't live without that! :-)

I'm completely addicted to that mouse cursor "hovering", LOL :-)

I just got my reply from apple developers "bug-dude":

- - -
Thank you for filing these requests/issues. We request that you restrict
your submissions to one issue per bug report. This allows us to
efficiently distribute the necessary information to Apple Engineering.

At this time, we kindly ask that you please resubmit each of these as
individual bug reports using the Bug Reporter.

<http://bugreporter.apple.com>

Again, thank you for your bug submissions. We appreciate your help in
discovering and isolating bugs.
- - -

So they closed my case and apparantly it looks/looked like they don't
want to do anything...

Even though it feels like they don't care about it, I finally took
myself together and filled in 3 individual requests...

> No support for 'active local variables'. Only the full set. Usually
> what I want is inside 'self' so I have to open that, seeing a very long
> list with only maybe 5 or 10 relevant to the code block I am in. VS is
> very smart about that (while letting you see all variables if you
> prefer).

Exactly...

> Lots of other limitations too. I am basically debugging with printf
> again (NSLog in this case, but same beast). I haven't had to do that in
> well over a decade. :-(

It really stinks.... :-(

I really hope they'll improve xcode and untill then I won't make any big
programs on xcode because I feel it's too difficult to track errors down
without this "mouse hovering thing"...

I mean: 1) Change program code and insert printf(""), 2) recompile, 3)
run the program from the beginning, 4) Figure out that the printf("")
should be in another place, 5) remove it and move it to somewhere else,
6) repeat all of this again and again and again.... Oh my god!

That is just too slow!


Best regards / Med venlig hilsen
Martin Jørgensen

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Home of Martin Jørgensen - http://www.martinjoergensen.dk

In comp.sys.mac.programmer.help Martin J?rgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:
>
>> Lots of other limitations too. I am basically debugging with printf
>> again (NSLog in this case, but same beast). I haven't had to do that in
>> well over a decade. :-(
>
> It really stinks.... :-(
>
> I really hope they'll improve xcode and untill then I won't make any big
> programs on xcode because I feel it's too difficult to track errors down
> without this "mouse hovering thing"...
>
> I mean: 1) Change program code and insert printf(""), 2) recompile, 3)
> run the program from the beginning, 4) Figure out that the printf("")
> should be in another place, 5) remove it and move it to somewhere else,
> 6) repeat all of this again and again and again.... Oh my god!
>
> That is just too slow!

Far be it from me to claim that Xcode is perfect. I hate it in many
different ways. But people, including myself, do manage to create and
debug large products with it. You should consider that, even though it may
lack certain features, and even though it may be a crash-prone crudbasket
(although getting much better these days), these things are livable. And
the fact that it's the only choice if you want to make Mac software should
be a good incentive to deal with it.

Rather than throwing up your hands after what appears to be mere *days* of
experimenting, it may be worth your while to consider that perhaps these
features aren't as essential as you believe, and that Xcode offers its own
unique advantages.

Personally, I ignore Xcode's GUI debugger except for showing me what line
I'm on, the *occasional* glance at local variables, and conveniences like
being able to click to step to the next line. I do 90% of my debugging
activities from the gdb command line. Not only does this free you from
much Xcode bugginess, give you Special Powers(tm), and feel right at home
for somebody used to a UNIX command-line (and if you don't feel right at
home there, you really *should* if you want to do work on the Mac), but
learning gdb makes you a much more powerful programmer on most any
UNIX-oid system. It's a skill that easily transfers to remote debugging of
a command-line tool on some FreeBSD system in another country, or to
debugging massively parallel applications running on a Linux cluster.

I don't really know what to say in response to the "debugging with printf"
commentary. I only do that when I have weird thread bugs or when I need to
trace the flow of execution through many different functions without
actually halting execution every time I hit one. (And you can do these
using breakpoint commands, but I find those less convenient than logs.)
This, in particular, seems to speak more of unfamiliarity than lack of
quality in the software.

In conclusion, I agree with pretty much all sides of this thread
simultaneously. Xcode sucks and could use much improvement, but at the
same time, stop whining, suck it up, and learn the tool.

--
Michael Ash
Rogue Amoeba Software

In article <hmfoh3-l66.ln1[at]news.tdc.dk>,
Martin Jørgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to learn xcode... But I don't like it as much as visual
> studio, because there are a couple of things which are really not
> logical I think...
>
> 1) For instance: When I debug using this "memory dump view", the numbers
> doesn't change to red when they're modified as in Visual studio - I
> really like this, since it's much easier to keep track on what's changed.

It does for me.

>
> 2) I also have to manually indent my program code properly... That
> really stinks... Or is it just me who missed something?

It's you. Automatic indenting prefs are available and fairly flexible.


G

--
"Congurutulation!!!" - The subject line on some spam I received recently.
I have no idea what it means, but it's such a cool "word" (by which I mean
pronouncable sequence of letters) regardless.

Michael Ash wrote:
> In comp.sys.mac.programmer.help Martin J?rgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:
-snip-

> debug large products with it. You should consider that, even though it may
> lack certain features, and even though it may be a crash-prone crudbasket
> (although getting much better these days), these things are livable. And
> the fact that it's the only choice if you want to make Mac software should
> be a good incentive to deal with it.

Ok, but I'm not a good programmer yet so all I can program on a mac is
simple standard C/C++ unix (command-line) programs without GUI.

> Rather than throwing up your hands after what appears to be mere *days* of
> experimenting, it may be worth your while to consider that perhaps these
> features aren't as essential as you believe, and that Xcode offers its own
> unique advantages.

Ok.

> Personally, I ignore Xcode's GUI debugger except for showing me what line
> I'm on, the *occasional* glance at local variables, and conveniences like
> being able to click to step to the next line. I do 90% of my debugging
> activities from the gdb command line. Not only does this free you from

Sounds interesting... But isn't that slow?

> much Xcode bugginess, give you Special Powers(tm), and feel right at home
> for somebody used to a UNIX command-line (and if you don't feel right at
> home there, you really *should* if you want to do work on the Mac), but
> learning gdb makes you a much more powerful programmer on most any
> UNIX-oid system. It's a skill that easily transfers to remote debugging of
> a command-line tool on some FreeBSD system in another country, or to
> debugging massively parallel applications running on a Linux cluster.

I see what you mean... I should *definately* try to learn to use gdb
command-line commands then...

> I don't really know what to say in response to the "debugging with printf"
> commentary. I only do that when I have weird thread bugs or when I need to
> trace the flow of execution through many different functions without
> actually halting execution every time I hit one. (And you can do these
> using breakpoint commands, but I find those less convenient than logs.)

How do you use logs?

> This, in particular, seems to speak more of unfamiliarity than lack of
> quality in the software.
>
> In conclusion, I agree with pretty much all sides of this thread
> simultaneously. Xcode sucks and could use much improvement, but at the
> same time, stop whining, suck it up, and learn the tool.

Ok, thanks a lot for telling how to get the "good things" out of it...


Best regards / Med venlig hilsen
Martin Jørgensen

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Home of Martin Jørgensen - http://www.martinjoergensen.dk

Gregory Weston wrote:
> In article <hmfoh3-l66.ln1[at]news.tdc.dk>,
> Martin Jørgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>I'm trying to learn xcode... But I don't like it as much as visual
>>studio, because there are a couple of things which are really not
>>logical I think...
>>
>>1) For instance: When I debug using this "memory dump view", the numbers
>>doesn't change to red when they're modified as in Visual studio - I
>>really like this, since it's much easier to keep track on what's changed.
>
>
> It does for me.

No, it doesn't. You're looking at the wrong place.

I bet you're looking in the debugger view (shift+apple+Y) and *not* in
the "memory browser".

The problem with the debugger view is that you can't visualize anything
but really small data arrays at the same time. If you have a for-loop,
the memory browser is better.

And the colors don't change here! I can't imagine that should work on
another way on your computer.

>>2) I also have to manually indent my program code properly... That
>>really stinks... Or is it just me who missed something?
>
>
> It's you. Automatic indenting prefs are available and fairly flexible.

FYI: The problem is already solved because someone else helped me by
telling where to look.

Otherwise I would say you're pretty arrogant, telling me that I have a
problem without telling me how to solve it when you obviously know it.


Best regards / Med venlig hilsen
Martin Jørgensen

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Home of Martin Jørgensen - http://www.martinjoergensen.dk

In article <ejk0i3-kfa.ln1[at]news.tdc.dk>,
Martin Jørgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:

> >>2) I also have to manually indent my program code properly... That
> >>really stinks... Or is it just me who missed something?
> >
> >
> > It's you. Automatic indenting prefs are available and fairly flexible.
>
> FYI: The problem is already solved because someone else helped me by
> telling where to look.
>
> Otherwise I would say you're pretty arrogant, telling me that I have a
> problem without telling me how to solve it when you obviously know it.

If it's "arrogant" for me to expect someone - a programmer of all
people, who you'd think would maybe be a little computer-savvy - to look
in the preferences window when they want to control the behavior of an
application, I suppose I'm guilty. But that's not how I've ever
understood the word arrogant. Now, to be so sure of how something
unfamiliar works that you don't even bother looking to see if you're
right before declaring it broken when it doesn't by default do what you
want ... _that_'s arrogant.

--
"Congurutulation!!!" - The subject line on some spam I received recently.
I have no idea what it means, but it's such a cool "word" (by which I mean
pronouncable sequence of letters) regardless.

In comp.sys.mac.programmer.help Martin J?rgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:
> Michael Ash wrote:
>> In comp.sys.mac.programmer.help Martin J?rgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:
> -snip-
>
>> debug large products with it. You should consider that, even though it may
>> lack certain features, and even though it may be a crash-prone crudbasket
>> (although getting much better these days), these things are livable. And
>> the fact that it's the only choice if you want to make Mac software should
>> be a good incentive to deal with it.
>
> Ok, but I'm not a good programmer yet so all I can program on a mac is
> simple standard C/C++ unix (command-line) programs without GUI.

Even so, it's the only game in town. I assume that you will one day want
to create larger projects (since you talked about larger projects), so it
will be helpful to learn the tools at hand.

Learning gdb will also mean that you can debug these simple C/C++ CLI
programs on any UNIX-like system, not just OS X.

>> Personally, I ignore Xcode's GUI debugger except for showing me what line
>> I'm on, the *occasional* glance at local variables, and conveniences like
>> being able to click to step to the next line. I do 90% of my debugging
>> activities from the gdb command line. Not only does this free you from
>
> Sounds interesting... But isn't that slow?

Much like a UNIX shell, it's slower than a GUI for simple operations, but
vastly more powerful and therefore faster for complex operations. For
example, if I want to see the contents of the local variable "x", I can't
just point to it as in VS, but have to type "p x", which is marginally
slower.

However, let's say that I have a void * pointing to an array of 24 floats.
In Xcode's GUI this will be difficult to see. I don't know how you'd do it
in VS but I imagine it's not directly simple either. In gdb, I just do:

(gdb) x/24fw voidPtr

Maybe I have a breakpoint in a function where I don't have the source code
(because it's a system library, for example), but I still want to see the
value of the first argument passed in. I can just do:

(gdb) p $r3

Let's say I have an array of 100 ints and I want to print the result of
calling a function on each one of them, but I have no actual code to do
the loop. I'd be shocked if any GUI could handle this, but in gdb it's
just:

(gdb) set $i = 0
(gdb) while $i < 100
>p func(array[$i])
>set $i = $i + 1
>end

Etc. etc.

>> much Xcode bugginess, give you Special Powers(tm), and feel right at home
>> for somebody used to a UNIX command-line (and if you don't feel right at
>> home there, you really *should* if you want to do work on the Mac), but
>> learning gdb makes you a much more powerful programmer on most any
>> UNIX-oid system. It's a skill that easily transfers to remote debugging of
>> a command-line tool on some FreeBSD system in another country, or to
>> debugging massively parallel applications running on a Linux cluster.
>
> I see what you mean... I should *definately* try to learn to use gdb
> command-line commands then...

I should warn you that it's difficult, but IMO very much worth learning.

>> I don't really know what to say in response to the "debugging with printf"
>> commentary. I only do that when I have weird thread bugs or when I need to
>> trace the flow of execution through many different functions without
>> actually halting execution every time I hit one. (And you can do these
>> using breakpoint commands, but I find those less convenient than logs.)
>
> How do you use logs?

I use them most frequently when developing methods that respond to events
in GUI applications where switching to another app (as happens when you
hit a breakpoint) will break the code. For example, debugging a mouse
tracking loop. Or sometimes it will be a long sequence of methods and I
suspect that one of them is getting called twice, or not at all. There, I
can just put in a bunch of:

NSLog([at]"%s", __func__)

(You can use fprintf or cerr in the same way, of course.) And if I want, I
can print parameters etc. at the same time. You could of course also do
this in gdb:

(gdb) break SomeFunction
(gdb) commands
>echo "Reached SomeFunction"
>print anArgument
>cont
>end

But for large numbers of functions, inserting temporary debugging code is
easier.

--
Michael Ash
Rogue Amoeba Software

Martin Jørgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:

> I really hope they'll improve xcode and untill then I won't make any big
> programs on xcode because I feel it's too difficult to track errors down
> without this "mouse hovering thing"...

Another massive loss is the ability to simply more the cursor to a
different line and say "continue from here" (NOT 'continue TO here').

With VS, I will sometimes do that to rerun a loop that I want to look at
more closely, or to skip over a block that I know has trouble.

I was quite surprised to find that not available in XCode.

--
- Burt Johnson
MindStorm, Inc.
http://www.mindstorm-inc.com/software.html

Michael Ash <mike[at]mikeash.com> wrote:

> Far be it from me to claim that Xcode is perfect. I hate it in many
> different ways. But people, including myself, do manage to create and
> debug large products with it. You should consider that, even though it may
> lack certain features, and even though it may be a crash-prone crudbasket
> (although getting much better these days), these things are livable. And
> the fact that it's the only choice if you want to make Mac software should
> be a good incentive to deal with it.

I wrote some major code in assembly with nothing but a single step
hardward controller in the 70's too. Doesn't mean I would want to do it
today, or that I would consider it world-class.

And actually you have this on its head. The fact that XCode is the only
way to write Mac software is a good incentive NOT to write Mac software.
I may love the platform, but I am not willing to walk over hot coals
barefoot to do so.

The Mac market is tiny, with very few real opportunities. The PC market
is huge and easy to find contracts. In the 90's, I did Mac almost
exclusively because the environment was so much better than the PC that
it was pleasurable. Ain't that way anymore though. :-(

> In conclusion, I agree with pretty much all sides of this thread
> simultaneously. Xcode sucks and could use much improvement, but at the
> same time, stop whining, suck it up, and learn the tool.

Nope. I won't "suck it up" just because it is Apple. Instead, I will
work on the Dark Side, where they actually have world class development
tools.

I have one Mac contract that I am fighting through now. I seriously
doubt I will accept any future Mac contracts now that I see just how bad
the Apple tools are.

The same was true last time Apple tried development tools. MPW was a sad
joke. If that had been the only environment available, I would have
dropped Mac and gone to PC. Instead there was Symantec ThinkC, and
later CodeWarrior. They made programming on the Mac far more advanced
than on the PC.

Unless Apple gets a world class IDE, they have no hope of enticing
enough programmers to want to develop for the Mac.

--
- Burt Johnson
MindStorm, Inc.
http://www.mindstorm-inc.com/software.html

In article <1hecflq.q3zyk7106z0ecN%burt[at]mindstorm-inc.com>,
burt[at]mindstorm-inc.com (Burt Johnson) wrote:

> Martin Jørgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:
>
> > I really hope they'll improve xcode and untill then I won't make any big
> > programs on xcode because I feel it's too difficult to track errors down
> > without this "mouse hovering thing"...
>
> Another massive loss is the ability to simply more the cursor to a
> different line and say "continue from here" (NOT 'continue TO here').
>
> With VS, I will sometimes do that to rerun a loop that I want to look at
> more closely, or to skip over a block that I know has trouble.
>
> I was quite surprised to find that not available in XCode.

I do that all the time - you need need to be careful to grab the pointer
that indicates the current line and not click just off of that and end
up setting a breakpoint.

In comp.sys.mac.programmer.help Burt Johnson <burt[at]mindstorm-inc.com> wrote:
> Michael Ash <mike[at]mikeash.com> wrote:
>
>> Far be it from me to claim that Xcode is perfect. I hate it in many
>> different ways. But people, including myself, do manage to create and
>> debug large products with it. You should consider that, even though it may
>> lack certain features, and even though it may be a crash-prone crudbasket
>> (although getting much better these days), these things are livable. And
>> the fact that it's the only choice if you want to make Mac software should
>> be a good incentive to deal with it.
>
> I wrote some major code in assembly with nothing but a single step
> hardward controller in the 70's too. Doesn't mean I would want to do it
> today, or that I would consider it world-class.

Comparing Xcode with embedded assembly is slightly facetious.

> And actually you have this on its head. The fact that XCode is the only
> way to write Mac software is a good incentive NOT to write Mac software.
> I may love the platform, but I am not willing to walk over hot coals
> barefoot to do so.

And that is your choice to make.

> The Mac market is tiny, with very few real opportunities. The PC market
> is huge and easy to find contracts. In the 90's, I did Mac almost
> exclusively because the environment was so much better than the PC that
> it was pleasurable. Ain't that way anymore though. :-(

I personally have had no trouble in it. It's a smaller market, but there's
way less competition too.

In any case, I feel that Xcode is "good enough", and any problems it has
is more than made up for the wonderful libraries and system I have to work
with. A Windows IDE would have to make coffee and write my code for me
before I would consider doing Win32, MFC, or .Net.

But then again, I'm pretty comfortable using nothing but emacs, gdb, and
make to write UNIX programs, so I probably have a somewhat different
perspective.

[snip]
> Unless Apple gets a world class IDE, they have no hope of enticing
> enough programmers to want to develop for the Mac.

What exactly is "enough"? Is there some cusp they're aiming for which
requires a critical mass of Mac developers?

The Mac software market seems pretty healthy from where I stand. More is
always better, but acting like Apple is doomed unless they can convince
you to work on their platform seems to be severely overstating things.

--
Michael Ash
Rogue Amoeba Software

Gregory Weston wrote:
> In article <ejk0i3-kfa.ln1[at]news.tdc.dk>,
> Martin Jørgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:
>
>
>>>>2) I also have to manually indent my program code properly... That
>>>>really stinks... Or is it just me who missed something?
>>>
>>>
>>>It's you. Automatic indenting prefs are available and fairly flexible.
>>
>>FYI: The problem is already solved because someone else helped me by
>>telling where to look.
>>
>>Otherwise I would say you're pretty arrogant, telling me that I have a
>>problem without telling me how to solve it when you obviously know it.
>
>
> If it's "arrogant" for me to expect someone - a programmer of all
> people, who you'd think would maybe be a little computer-savvy - to look
> in the preferences window when they want to control the behavior of an
> application, I suppose I'm guilty. But that's not how I've ever
> understood the word arrogant. Now, to be so sure of how something
> unfamiliar works that you don't even bother looking to see if you're
> right before declaring it broken when it doesn't by default do what you
> want ... _that_'s arrogant.

It must be really easy for you, who just happens to know how the program
works, to call other people "arrogant" just because they don't know how
the program works.

Unfortunately you didn't understood the word "arrogant". People are not
"arrogant" just because they don't know how a program works.

FYI: People on the usenet does not know every single computer program in
the whole world, so it's perfectly legal to ask what is wrong, when the
program doesn't do as expected to do. And it's very common too - it
happens all the time.

You are arrogant... Anyone can see it. You don't want to help - so what
do you think you are actually doing here in this thread, except spamming it?


Best regards / Med venlig hilsen
Martin Jørgensen

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Home of Martin Jørgensen - http://www.martinjoergensen.dk

Michael Ash wrote:
> In comp.sys.mac.programmer.help Martin J?rgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:
-snip-

> Even so, it's the only game in town. I assume that you will one day want
> to create larger projects (since you talked about larger projects), so it
> will be helpful to learn the tools at hand.

Yep. I'm doing my bachelor project in VS - it's a "larger project", but
still not a GUI program. I does a lot of calculations and saves results
to files which I import in another program...

> Learning gdb will also mean that you can debug these simple C/C++ CLI
> programs on any UNIX-like system, not just OS X.

Agreed, nice.

>>>Personally, I ignore Xcode's GUI debugger except for showing me what line
>>>I'm on, the *occasional* glance at local variables, and conveniences like
>>>being able to click to step to the next line. I do 90% of my debugging
>>>activities from the gdb command line. Not only does this free you from
>>
>>Sounds interesting... But isn't that slow?
>
>
> Much like a UNIX shell, it's slower than a GUI for simple operations, but
> vastly more powerful and therefore faster for complex operations. For
> example, if I want to see the contents of the local variable "x", I can't
> just point to it as in VS, but have to type "p x", which is marginally
> slower.
>
> However, let's say that I have a void * pointing to an array of 24 floats.
> In Xcode's GUI this will be difficult to see. I don't know how you'd do it
> in VS but I imagine it's not directly simple either. In gdb, I just do:
>
> (gdb) x/24fw voidPtr

hehe... Depends... In VS I think I can also just point to it with the
mouse cursor, but what it does depends... Sometimes:

Hovering the mouse over a pointer variable: It'll first give me the
address to which it is pointing to. Then there's a small "+" below it
and when I move the mouse on top of the "+" it expands and shows me the
first pointed-to-value.

I think that applies to all pointers to "simple" types such as: int,
double, float, char... Really nice and fast :-)

If it knows an array defined as "int *array_pointer[100]", I think it'll
still expand and moreover it'll expand with about the 10 first
lines/values, i.e.: *array_pointer[0], *array_pointer[1],
*array_pointer[2], *array_pointer[3]...... and in the bottom there's a
small arrow that goes down. When you move the mouse on top of that small
arrow, you can actually scroll down through all 100 values - AFAIR...

You can also just directly copy/paste the address of the pointer to the
"memory view" if you want to visualize large arrays - And here I really
like that the values get red after being modified, when you're stepping
through the program.

But since you wrote it's a void-pointer then I'm not sure if it'll do
all of this... It'll probably only show the address, which I then just
copy/paste to the "memory view" and then I can see all the addresses and
choose if it should convert the data to float/64-bit double/4-byte
int/8-byte int... (I can't remember all the options)...

If the pointers are int** (pointers-to-pointers), then there's two
"+"'es that I can expand with my mouse, just by holding the mouse cursor
on top of the pointer variable...

So you see... It's *really* nice and ultra-fast to check something... I
would like that in xcode and actually thought it was "industry standard"
for a modern debugger (GUI)......

> Maybe I have a breakpoint in a function where I don't have the source code
> (because it's a system library, for example), but I still want to see the
> value of the first argument passed in. I can just do:
>
> (gdb) p $r3
>
> Let's say I have an array of 100 ints and I want to print the result of
> calling a function on each one of them, but I have no actual code to do
> the loop. I'd be shocked if any GUI could handle this, but in gdb it's
> just:
>
> (gdb) set $i = 0
> (gdb) while $i < 100
> >p func(array[$i])
> >set $i = $i + 1
> >end
>
> Etc. etc.

Nice...

>>>much Xcode bugginess, give you Special Powers(tm), and feel right at home
>>>for somebody used to a UNIX command-line (and if you don't feel right at
>>>home there, you really *should* if you want to do work on the Mac), but
>>>learning gdb makes you a much more powerful programmer on most any
>>>UNIX-oid system. It's a skill that easily transfers to remote debugging of
>>>a command-line tool on some FreeBSD system in another country, or to
>>>debugging massively parallel applications running on a Linux cluster.
>>
>>I see what you mean... I should *definately* try to learn to use gdb
>>command-line commands then...
>
>
> I should warn you that it's difficult, but IMO very much worth learning.

At least I think I should learn the basics...

>>>I don't really know what to say in response to the "debugging with printf"
>>>commentary. I only do that when I have weird thread bugs or when I need to
>>>trace the flow of execution through many different functions without
>>>actually halting execution every time I hit one. (And you can do these
>>>using breakpoint commands, but I find those less convenient than logs.)
>>
>>How do you use logs?
>
>
> I use them most frequently when developing methods that respond to events
> in GUI applications where switching to another app (as happens when you
> hit a breakpoint) will break the code. For example, debugging a mouse
> tracking loop. Or sometimes it will be a long sequence of methods and I
> suspect that one of them is getting called twice, or not at all. There, I
> can just put in a bunch of:
>
> NSLog([at]"%s", __func__)
>
> (You can use fprintf or cerr in the same way, of course.) And if I want, I
> can print parameters etc. at the same time. You could of course also do
> this in gdb:
>
> (gdb) break SomeFunction
> (gdb) commands

Ok.

>>echo "Reached SomeFunction"
>>print anArgument
>>cont
>>end
>
>
> But for large numbers of functions, inserting temporary debugging code is
> easier.

Yep, ok.


Best regards / Med venlig hilsen
Martin Jørgensen

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Home of Martin Jørgensen - http://www.martinjoergensen.dk

In article <6pd2i3-j5b.ln1[at]news.tdc.dk>,
Martin Jørgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:

> Gregory Weston wrote:
> > In article <ejk0i3-kfa.ln1[at]news.tdc.dk>,
> > Martin Jørgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>>2) I also have to manually indent my program code properly... That
> >>>>really stinks... Or is it just me who missed something?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>It's you. Automatic indenting prefs are available and fairly flexible.
> >>
> >>FYI: The problem is already solved because someone else helped me by
> >>telling where to look.
> >>
> >>Otherwise I would say you're pretty arrogant, telling me that I have a
> >>problem without telling me how to solve it when you obviously know it.
> >
> >
> > If it's "arrogant" for me to expect someone - a programmer of all
> > people, who you'd think would maybe be a little computer-savvy - to look
> > in the preferences window when they want to control the behavior of an
> > application, I suppose I'm guilty. But that's not how I've ever
> > understood the word arrogant. Now, to be so sure of how something
> > unfamiliar works that you don't even bother looking to see if you're
> > right before declaring it broken when it doesn't by default do what you
> > want ... _that_'s arrogant.
>
> It must be really easy for you, who just happens to know how the program
> works, to call other people "arrogant" just because they don't know how
> the program works.

I have never - not once in my life - expressed the nonsensical belief
that someone was arrogant "just because" the didn't know how something
worked. If you think I did in the above text, I suggest you read more
carefully and request that you apologize for implying that I'm stupid
enough to make that error.


> Unfortunately you didn't understood the word "arrogant".

But I do. Apparently better than you do.


> People are not
> "arrogant" just because they don't know how a program works.

You're right. And I didn't say otherwise. What I _said_ was that it was
arrogant to be so sure that one's uniformed guess was correct that a
disconnect between expectation and reality indicated brokenness on the
part of reality.

> FYI: People on the usenet does not know every single computer program in
> the whole world,

True. Did I suggest that people on Usenet did or should be expected to
know every single program in the whole world? (Hint: No.)

> so it's perfectly legal to ask what is wrong, when the
> program doesn't do as expected to do. And it's very common too - it
> happens all the time.

You didn't ask what was wrong. You asserted that a behavior that exists
doesn't without, apparently, making the most cursory check to verify
that assumption. Sadly, that _does_ seem to happen "all the time."


> You are arrogant...

Not particularly.

> Anyone can see it. You don't want to help -

Wrong. Which (ahem) you'd know if you did the most cursory check before
making that assertion.

> so what
> do you think you are actually doing here in this thread, except spamming it?

I thought I was answering a question. If you didn't like the answer, or
didn't ask the question you meant to, that's your own affair.

--
"Congurutulation!!!" - The subject line on some spam I received recently.
I have no idea what it means, but it's such a cool "word" (by which I mean
pronouncable sequence of letters) regardless.

Gregory Weston wrote:
> In article <6pd2i3-j5b.ln1[at]news.tdc.dk>,
> Martin Jørgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Gregory Weston wrote:
>>
>>>In article <ejk0i3-kfa.ln1[at]news.tdc.dk>,
>>> Martin Jørgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>2) I also have to manually indent my program code properly... That
>>>>>>really stinks... Or is it just me who missed something?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>It's you. Automatic indenting prefs are available and fairly flexible.
>>>>
>>>>FYI: The problem is already solved because someone else helped me by
>>>>telling where to look.
>>>>
>>>>Otherwise I would say you're pretty arrogant, telling me that I have a
>>>>problem without telling me how to solve it when you obviously know it.
>>>
>>>
>>>If it's "arrogant" for me to expect someone - a programmer of all
>>>people, who you'd think would maybe be a little computer-savvy - to look
>>>in the preferences window when they want to control the behavior of an
>>>application, I suppose I'm guilty. But that's not how I've ever
>>>understood the word arrogant. Now, to be so sure of how something
>>>unfamiliar works that you don't even bother looking to see if you're
>>>right before declaring it broken when it doesn't by default do what you
>>>want ... _that_'s arrogant.
>>
>>It must be really easy for you, who just happens to know how the program
>>works, to call other people "arrogant" just because they don't know how
>>the program works.
>
>
> I have never - not once in my life - expressed the nonsensical belief
> that someone was arrogant "just because" the didn't know how something
> worked. If you think I did in the above text, I suggest you read more
> carefully and request that you apologize for implying that I'm stupid
> enough to make that error.
>
>
>
>>Unfortunately you didn't understood the word "arrogant".
>
>
> But I do. Apparently better than you do.
>
>
>
>>People are not
>>"arrogant" just because they don't know how a program works.
>
>
> You're right. And I didn't say otherwise. What I _said_ was that it was
> arrogant to be so sure that one's uniformed guess was correct that a
> disconnect between expectation and reality indicated brokenness on the
> part of reality.
>
>
>>FYI: People on the usenet does not know every single computer program in
>>the whole world,
>
>
> True. Did I suggest that people on Usenet did or should be expected to
> know every single program in the whole world? (Hint: No.)
>
>
>>so it's perfectly legal to ask what is wrong, when the
>>program doesn't do as expected to do. And it's very common too - it
>>happens all the time.
>
>
> You didn't ask what was wrong. You asserted that a behavior that exists
> doesn't without, apparently, making the most cursory check to verify
> that assumption. Sadly, that _does_ seem to happen "all the time."
>
>
>
>>You are arrogant...
>
>
> Not particularly.
>
>
>>Anyone can see it. You don't want to help -
>
>
> Wrong. Which (ahem) you'd know if you did the most cursory check before
> making that assertion.
>
>
>>so what
>>do you think you are actually doing here in this thread, except spamming it?
>
>
> I thought I was answering a question. If you didn't like the answer, or
> didn't ask the question you meant to, that's your own affair.

You're a complete pathetic moron... All this crap you're writing... So
meaningless...

You didn't help me and it seemed like you never wanted to help me, but
only critize everything you could possible think of.


Best regards / Med venlig hilsen
Martin Jørgensen

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Home of Martin Jørgensen - http://www.martinjoergensen.dk

In comp.sys.mac.programmer.help Martin J?rgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:
>>
>>>so what
>>>do you think you are actually doing here in this thread, except spamming it?
>>
>>
>> I thought I was answering a question. If you didn't like the answer, or
>> didn't ask the question you meant to, that's your own affair.
>
> You're a complete pathetic moron... All this crap you're writing... So
> meaningless...
>
> You didn't help me and it seemed like you never wanted to help me, but
> only critize everything you could possible think of.

Gregory is one of the most helpful people in here. Apologizing to him and
being kind to him in the future will probably be helpful for you in the
long run.

There is a huge difference between saying "I can't find options for X,
does it exist, and where is it?" and saying "The application is horribly
broken because it does not include X!" when X does, in fact, exist, and is
not difficult to find.

You stated that Xcode did not have syntax highlighting merely because you
could not find it. You were called on this baseless assertion. Rather than
take it reasonably, you decided to act out against somebody who helped
you. (Hint: telling you it exists *is* help, even if it may not be exactly
what you want. If you want the help to be exactly what you want, I'm sure
that many of the group's subscribers will be happy to send you their rate
cards.)

--
Michael Ash
Rogue Amoeba Software

You get what you pay for. :-(

Paul


Martin Jørgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to learn xcode... But I don't like it as much as visual
> studio, because there are a couple of things which are really not
> logical I think...
>
> 1) For instance: When I debug using this "memory dump view", the numbers
> doesn't change to red when they're modified as in Visual studio - I
> really like this, since it's much easier to keep track on what's changed.
>
> 2) I also have to manually indent my program code properly... That
> really stinks... Or is it just me who missed something? I tried to mark
> everything and go to "Format"-menu + "re-indent" and "balance"...
> Nothing worked... Still looks ugly as hell... Perhaps I need to change
> some options somewhere?
>
> 3) Take a look at this small program:
>
>
> #include <iostream>
> using namespace std;
>
> class test
> {
> private:
> int abc;
>
> public:
> test() : abc(911) {}
>
> int& member_test()
> {
> return abc-11;
> }
>
> };
>
>
> int main()
> {
> cout << endl << endl;
>
> test c;
>
> cout << "HI" << " test = " << c.member_test();
>
> return 0;
> }
>
>
> Xcode doesn't even tell me the return value of the function, when I use
> the debugger....! I would expect something like, when I put a breakpoint
> and when c.member_test() is about to return (or just after it returned),
> then the debugger variable window should tell me that: "c.member_test()
> returned 900". But it doesn't!
>
> The only way I can see what it returned is by watching what comes out on
> the screen... That is unacceptable... I hoped there was another GUI
> debugger/IDE available that can be recommended for mac os X, if these
> issues can't be solved...
>
> Could anyone help me with these 3 issues? There are also other things
> which I hate with xcode, but perhaps I can learn to like it if somebody
> here can learn me how to use it a bit better....
>
> TIA.
>
>
> Best regards / Med venlig hilsen
> Martin Jørgensen

Michael Ash wrote:
> In comp.sys.mac.programmer.help Martin J?rgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:
-snip-

> You stated that Xcode did not have syntax highlighting merely because you
> could not find it. You were called on this baseless assertion. Rather than

It's allowed to use ones brain and come to the conclusion that xcode
didn't have syntax highlighting correctly working on my machine. I won't
critizize somebody who is actually capable of obviously using their
brain and who shows they can come to that conclusion already right-away
from the very beginning.

But if people thinks something else - then it's their own mistake and
not mine. It just proves that they never intended to understand the
original problem, if they deliberaty insists on writing nothing but pure
nonsense.

> take it reasonably, you decided to act out against somebody who helped
> you. (Hint: telling you it exists *is* help, even if it may not be exactly
> what you want. If you want the help to be exactly what you want, I'm sure
> that many of the group's subscribers will be happy to send you their rate
> cards.)

I don't understand anything of that nonsense at all and frankly I don't
care about your nonsense. What part of "he didn't help me" was too
difficult for you to understand? It might be that you think he helped
me, but then I tell you that he didn't help me with anything at all, but
writing useless nonsense. I can't see it should be harder than that to
understand.

Of course it's always nice to be friendly to people, but I don't see I
did anything wrong simply just by explaining him the actual realities,
which are that even though he has high thoughts about himself - then the
fact is that he didn't help me at all.


Best regards / Med venlig hilsen
Martin Jørgensen

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Home of Martin Jørgensen - http://www.martinjoergensen.dk

In comp.sys.mac.programmer.help Martin J?rgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:
> Michael Ash wrote:
>> In comp.sys.mac.programmer.help Martin J?rgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:
> -snip-
>
>> You stated that Xcode did not have syntax highlighting merely because you
>> could not find it. You were called on this baseless assertion. Rather than
>
> It's allowed to use ones brain and come to the conclusion that xcode
> didn't have syntax highlighting correctly working on my machine. I won't
> critizize somebody who is actually capable of obviously using their
> brain and who shows they can come to that conclusion already right-away
> from the very beginning.

You said something like, "or am I just making a mistake?" Gregory's
response was basically, "yes you are, look harder." If you can't deal with
that kind of response, then you have no business being anywhere near
usenet.

> But if people thinks something else - then it's their own mistake and
> not mine. It just proves that they never intended to understand the
> original problem, if they deliberaty insists on writing nothing but pure
> nonsense.

I understood all of Gregory's posts far better than I understood any of
yours.

>> take it reasonably, you decided to act out against somebody who helped
>> you. (Hint: telling you it exists *is* help, even if it may not be exactly
>> what you want. If you want the help to be exactly what you want, I'm sure
>> that many of the group's subscribers will be happy to send you their rate
>> cards.)
>
> I don't understand anything of that nonsense at all and frankly I don't
> care about your nonsense. What part of "he didn't help me" was too
> difficult for you to understand? It might be that you think he helped
> me, but then I tell you that he didn't help me with anything at all, but
> writing useless nonsense. I can't see it should be harder than that to
> understand.
>
> Of course it's always nice to be friendly to people, but I don't see I
> did anything wrong simply just by explaining him the actual realities,
> which are that even though he has high thoughts about himself - then the
> fact is that he didn't help me at all.

Guess I'd better note your name. Clearly you are incapable of dealing with
responses that are not exactly what you want. Since responses are rarely
exactly what you want even when you're paying, and it's much worse in a
free forum such as this, better not to respond at all.

--
Michael Ash
Rogue Amoeba Software

Michael Ash wrote:
> In comp.sys.mac.programmer.help Martin J?rgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:
>
>>Michael Ash wrote:
>>
>>>In comp.sys.mac.programmer.help Martin J?rgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:
>>
>>-snip-
>>
>>
>>>You stated that Xcode did not have syntax highlighting merely because you
>>>could not find it. You were called on this baseless assertion. Rather than
>>
>>It's allowed to use ones brain and come to the conclusion that xcode
>>didn't have syntax highlighting correctly working on my machine. I won't
>>critizize somebody who is actually capable of obviously using their
>>brain and who shows they can come to that conclusion already right-away
>>from the very beginning.
>
>
> You said something like, "or am I just making a mistake?" Gregory's
> response was basically, "yes you are, look harder." If you can't deal with
> that kind of response, then you have no business being anywhere near
> usenet.

I can easily live with that - the problem is that its very clear to me
that you have some kind of problem with reading what this problem is
about. So I suggest you either get used to how things work on usenet or
else you stop reading usenet-posts. It's really as simple as that.

>>But if people thinks something else - then it's their own mistake and
>>not mine. It just proves that they never intended to understand the
>>original problem, if they deliberaty insists on writing nothing but pure
>>nonsense.
>
>
> I understood all of Gregory's posts far better than I understood any of
> yours.

Still, he didn't helped me. And I should be the best to know about that,
since I was the one asking for the solution of a problem.

If you don't understand what other people writes, well then that's
basically not my problem.

>>>take it reasonably, you decided to act out against somebody who helped
>>>you. (Hint: telling you it exists *is* help, even if it may not be exactly
>>>what you want. If you want the help to be exactly what you want, I'm sure
>>>that many of the group's subscribers will be happy to send you their rate
>>>cards.)
>>
>>I don't understand anything of that nonsense at all and frankly I don't
>>care about your nonsense. What part of "he didn't help me" was too
>>difficult for you to understand? It might be that you think he helped
>>me, but then I tell you that he didn't help me with anything at all, but
>>writing useless nonsense. I can't see it should be harder than that to
>>understand.
>>
>>Of course it's always nice to be friendly to people, but I don't see I
>>did anything wrong simply just by explaining him the actual realities,
>>which are that even though he has high thoughts about himself - then the
>>fact is that he didn't help me at all.
>
>
> Guess I'd better note your name. Clearly you are incapable of dealing with
> responses that are not exactly what you want. Since responses are rarely

.... "Clearly you are incapable of dealing with responses that are not
exactly what you want"..... LOL...

That is a very deep and interesting statement, although I don't think
you understand exactly *HOW* interesting it is...

> exactly what you want even when you're paying, and it's much worse in a
> free forum such as this, better not to respond at all.

I see you came to a good conclusion that obviously works for you then. I
suggest you don't respond at all, if that is what really makes you happy.


Best regards / Med venlig hilsen
Martin Jørgensen

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Home of Martin Jørgensen - http://www.martinjoergensen.dk

Paul Fredlein wrote:
> You get what you pay for. :-(
>
> Paul

What do you mean?

I got answers and I didn't pay anything except time, like everyone else.
I'm happy and most other people here seems happy too.

If anyone such as Michael Ash doesn't like that, then he is free to
leave this forum and never come back again. I won't stop him - and I
won't miss him.


Best regards / Med venlig hilsen
Martin Jørgensen

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Home of Martin Jørgensen - http://www.martinjoergensen.dk

On 29/4/06 04:54, "Martin Jørgensen" wrote:
>
> If anyone such as Michael Ash doesn't like that, then he is free to
> leave this forum and never come back again. I won't stop him - and I
> won't miss him.

I would miss him, and I'm sure many others would too. He has
consistently provided helpful answers to all manner of programming
problems; his style is of patient, gentle guidance, even in the
face of arrogant boneheadedness. This newsgroup would be the
notablby poorer for his absence.

You, however, would not be missed.

Stuart

In comp.sys.mac.programmer.help Martin J?rgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:
> Paul Fredlein wrote:
>> You get what you pay for. :-(
>>
>> Paul
>
> What do you mean?
>
> I got answers and I didn't pay anything except time, like everyone else.
> I'm happy and most other people here seems happy too.
>
> If anyone such as Michael Ash doesn't like that, then he is free to
> leave this forum and never come back again. I won't stop him - and I
> won't miss him.

I can *taste* the arrogance in the air....

For what it's worth, I was not complaining about your behavior, merely
advising you on the best way to actually get help. You may have received
the help you want *this* time, but you'll presumably be back here again
with more questions, and cultivating a good attitude from day one is
essential to geeting good responses from the other subscribers.

But it's clearly too late for you. I plonk thee with reckless abandon!

--
Michael Ash
Rogue Amoeba Software

Martin Jørgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:

> If anyone such as Michael Ash doesn't like that, then he is free to
> leave this forum and never come back again. I won't stop him - and I
> won't miss him.

You have made me regret agreeing with you at the start. Your attitude
in this thread makes it clear that we do not share the same opinion
after all.

You have the honor of being the first plonk I have made in this
newsgroup...

--
- Burt Johnson
MindStorm, Inc.
http://www.mindstorm-inc.com/software.html

Michael Ash wrote:
> In comp.sys.mac.programmer.help Martin J?rgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:
>
>>Paul Fredlein wrote:
>>
>>>You get what you pay for. :-(
>>>
>>>Paul
>>
>>What do you mean?
>>
>>I got answers and I didn't pay anything except time, like everyone else.
>>I'm happy and most other people here seems happy too.
>>
>>If anyone such as Michael Ash doesn't like that, then he is free to
>>leave this forum and never come back again. I won't stop him - and I
>>won't miss him.
>
>
> I can *taste* the arrogance in the air....
>
> For what it's worth, I was not complaining about your behavior, merely
> advising you on the best way to actually get help. You may have received
> the help you want *this* time, but you'll presumably be back here again
> with more questions, and cultivating a good attitude from day one is
> essential to geeting good responses from the other subscribers.
>
> But it's clearly too late for you. I plonk thee with reckless abandon!

Well, I see other people tells me that you can write other things than
completely foolish nonsense here... I guess I'll have to believe that.
But I never really understood any of your criticism... I mean: Let's
look at the topic line: "Re: newbie with xcode - Am *VERY* disappointed..."

That seemed like something you really had too much problems with. If you
also have the same kind of problems outside usenet, then I'm pretty glad
I'm not you. I mean: Most other people can easily live with such a topic
line. I don't find it "abrasive" *AT ALL*, ok?

That subject line *ISN'T* abrasive and Apple *DOESN'T* make perfect
software, okay? I know it's very hard for you to read and that you can't
accept it...

So, let's look at the facts: I completely disagree with you and the only
way you seem to be able to cope with this, is that you claim you're
using your kill-filter. If that works for you to get a better life, then
fine...

Good thing I'm not working together with you, if you can't handle anyone
who disagrees about such a small thing as if the topic line in this
thread is "abrasive" or not... Jesus christ... Get a life.


Best regards / Med venlig hilsen
Martin Jørgensen

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Home of Martin Jørgensen - http://www.martinjoergensen.dk

Martin Jørgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:

> Paul Fredlein wrote:
> > You get what you pay for. :-(
> >
> > Paul
>
> What do you mean?
>

I mean XCode is free, you get what you pay for.

Paul


> I got answers and I didn't pay anything except time, like everyone else.
> I'm happy and most other people here seems happy too.
>
> If anyone such as Michael Ash doesn't like that, then he is free to
> leave this forum and never come back again. I won't stop him - and I
> won't miss him.
>
>
> Best regards / Med venlig hilsen
> Martin Jørgensen

Paul Fredlein wrote:
> Martin Jørgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Paul Fredlein wrote:
>>
>>>You get what you pay for. :-(
>>>
>>>Paul
>>
>>What do you mean?
>>
>
>
> I mean XCode is free, you get what you pay for.
>
> Paul

Okay, considering the last couple of replies I got I thought you meant
that since I got answers in this newsgroup for free (I didn't pay for
them), then the quality of the replies in this newsgroup was/is also
miserable (mainly the last couple of posts - the first replies was okay).

Instead, I now realize that you meant: Since xcode is free, then the
quality is also poor. Well in both cases: I agree.

The solution has been discussed in a constructive way and I'm happy
about that, but I still have that bad taste in my mouth of some
(unnamed) moron who thinks I did something wrong, while I don't think so.


Best regards / Med venlig hilsen
Martin Jørgensen

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Home of Martin Jørgensen - http://www.martinjoergensen.dk

Xcode is a pretty mask over a stinking heap of old UNIX tools. It's a
miserable excuse for an IDE. Can't find software for MacOS? That's
Objective C and Xcode at work.

I love MacOS because it's one of the easiest to maintain UNIX systems
around. I can do server software development and run internet services
without spending all day downloading patches, recompiling the kernel,
and reading man pages.

I hate MacOS because Apple treats developers like dirt. JVMs are
released at a glacial pace, critical bugs go unfixed, beta software
access is expensive, C++ support is minimal, and Xcode is very painful
to use on large projects. Apple better get a lot better at writing
everything themselves. Doesn't it worry anybody that Apple has to write
their own word processor and spreadsheet software to keep customers?

In article <uce-BD51C5.23185824042006[at]comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
Gregory Weston <uce[at]splook.com> wrote:

> In article <hmfoh3-l66.ln1[at]news.tdc.dk>,
> Martin Jørgensen <unoder.spam[at]spam.jay.net> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm trying to learn xcode... But I don't like it as much as visual
> > studio, because there are a couple of things which are really not
> > logical I think...
> >
> > 1) For instance: When I debug using this "memory dump view", the numbers
> > doesn't change to red when they're modified as in Visual studio - I
> > really like this, since it's much easier to keep track on what's changed.
>
> It does for me.
>
> >
> > 2) I also have to manually indent my program code properly... That
> > really stinks... Or is it just me who missed something?
>
> It's you. Automatic indenting prefs are available and fairly flexible.
>
>
> G

I wish it correctly indented following ::GlobalNamespaceMethod().

In article
<mcmurtri-A812AA.23023230072006[at]sn-radius.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>,
Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtri[at]dslextreme.com> wrote:

> Xcode is a pretty mask over a stinking heap of old UNIX tools.

Some of Xcode's functionality is actually derived from a collection of
command-line tools which have been around for a long time but are
actively maintained and improved. That's a very different thing.

> It's a miserable excuse for an IDE. Can't find software for MacOS?
> That's Objective C and Xcode at work.

Um. No. Simply false. Given that there's no requirement to use either
Xcode or Objective-C for Mac OS development, citing their mere existence
as a reason for a relative lack of software is nonsensical at best. On
the other hand, your posting history seems to suggest an agenda.

> I hate MacOS because Apple treats developers like dirt.

Enterprise quality development tools for free and better documentation
than most OS vendors?

> beta software access is expensive,

That's called leak control. Most people don't need beta software access.
Pricing it high is a form of risk management.

> C++ support is minimal,

??? How so?

> and Xcode is very painful to use on large projects.

??? Ever tried? (And what's "large?")

> Doesn't it worry anybody that Apple has to write
> their own word processor and spreadsheet software to keep customers?

Hey, grandma! What a fascinating misreading of reality you've got.

--
What I write is what I mean. I request that anyone who decides to respond
please refrain from "disagreeing" with something I didn't write in the first
place.