Lazarus for C++?

[TBMan]

Lazarus stepped up when Borland dropped the ball. I wish I had found it sooner. One language I always wanted to learn was C/C++ and I had started years ago with Turbo C, but then started a family and my interest in coding fell off. I have Dev C, and I can get code to compile, but, well, it isn't Lazarus, it isn't Turbo C. I need something "idiot proof." that runs in Windows (not DOSBOX).  Is there a Lazarus C++ in the works?

[marcov]

No. Not from FPC/Lazarus teams, nor external to my best knowledge.

[Martin_fr]

It depends what you are looking for...

GUI/Form design
Debugger
Editor and Project management
Compiler support

Maybe have a look at Code::Blocks? I haven't used it myself. But it seems to be the C IDE to go (if you take out any big-corporation software, which may also come for free)

Anyway, if you want more feedback on C++ compatible products you likely get more feedback on their forums.

Getting a 1 to 1 comparison with Lazarus may be hard.

[marcov]

I mostly hear QT Creator.  I myself use MP LAb X (which is a netbeans derivate), but that is for plain C(and a bit C++) and embedded.

[Nimbus]

C++Builder CE is surely the closest match. As long as you're ok with its license terms.

[TBMan]

Ok thanks everyone. I look at the compilers suggested.

[Thaddy]

Bit late to the party, but the way I work with Lazarus instead of C++ Builder is that I design the GUI in Lazarus and call out to separate C(++) libraries to access the C(++) functionalities in shared libraries.
I have been a long time beta-tester of C++ builder in the past and it never quite came up really well, always a bit uncomfortable to my taste.
The advantage of my approach is separation of display and functionality and works with any C compiler.

[JD]

Ok thanks everyone. I look at the compilers suggested.

I've used Dev-C++ too in the past. Try JetBrains' CLion, which is now free for non-commercial use.

https://www.jetbrains.com/clion/

[VisualLab]

To supplement what the previous speakers mentioned:

• Qt Creator - has a graphical GUI editor for window applications (uses the Qt library),
• wxDevCpp - has a graphical GUI editor for window applications (https://wxdev-c-plus-plus.en.lo4d.com/windows, uses the wxWidgets library),
• Code::Blocks - no graphical GUI design (you have to "type" it yourself in the code, this is a job and a tool rather for masochists),
• NetBeans after installing plugins that support C/C++ and setting the paths to the installed MinGW and MSYS packages - no graphical GUI design (in this case you also have to "type" it yourself in the code, so in the case of C++ this is also a tool rather for masochists).

It is worth remembering that Qt Creator has many components (library code, internal tools) that pure C++ does not have. It needs them for decent GUI support. So, just knowing C++ well won't help. It is necessary to be well acquainted with the specifics of the Qt library.

The wxWidgets library is open source software.

MSYS is needed because of the make program. Make from the MingGW package is problematic for some reason when trying to use it in NetBeans.

As for the MPLAB X IDE - it basically supports microcontrollers manufactured by Microchip and the former Atmel, bought out by Microchip (probably the people from Microchip are very allergic to Eclipse and they are probably right).

[marcov]

I sometimes use Visual Studio's community edition from time to time to wrap C++ code in a DLL. Usually SDKs without plain C or (good) COM interface and occasionally some SSE /AVX intrinsic code. It depends heavily on the moment though, I haven't done it in a few years because I didn't do projects that required switch SDKs.

The community editions of VS have less license limitations than BCB, and versions other than the latest and greatest are longer available (I still use 2015)  I don't produce GUI apps with it anyway

MP Lab X is not ideal, even as editor (it requires 8-16GB, but won't load the 3MB files .h headers with per CPU definitions) as that would make the system unstable/unresponsive. It is purely the integration with the microchip tools.

[Thaddy]

@VisualLab,

The problem is a working two way GUI/Code and vice versa and the ones you mentioned do not do that or only to some extend.

[simone]

• Code::Blocks - no graphical GUI design (you have to "type" it yourself in the code, this is a job and a tool rather for masochists),

Just a small clarification about Code::Blocks: you can use wxSmith for RAD development of GUI applications, available built-in from the IDE.

See:

https://wiki.codeblocks.org/index.php/WxSmith_plugin

and, for a comparison with similar tools:

https://wiki.codeblocks.org/index.php/Comparison_of_wxSmith_features

Bit late to the party, but the way I work with Lazarus instead of C++ Builder is that I design the GUI in Lazarus and call out to separate C(++) libraries to access the C(++) functionalities in shared libraries.
I have been a long time beta-tester of C++ builder in the past and it never quite came up really well, always a bit uncomfortable to my taste.
The advantage of my approach is separation of display and functionality and works with any C compiler.

I totally agree with this approach, which in my opinion is the best. I do the same thing.

[Remy Lebeau]

I have been a long time beta-tester of C++ builder in the past and it never quite came up really well, always a bit uncomfortable to my taste.

Whereas I'm the opposite, I spent 20 years using C++Builder (almost) exclusively for my work.

[Thaddy]

Well, you were/are a beta tester too, I believe.
I stopped after 5 and that is old, I know.
I accept that it may be considerably improved.
I want nobody to be on the wrong foot here.

[TBMan]

I'm going to stick with the Dev C++ I have right now.

I'm going to try to code a simple TicTacToe game in text mode.