Today I succeeded in installing and running the "Studio" ; for my usage I think there are too many functions which I would never use and destabilize me, I preferred the original GCB (I will go back with my Windows image ... )
Last edit: Bertrand BAROTH 2022-08-17
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Indeed Studio is very powerful, perhaps even too much.
For more complex and large programs I always prefer to use the SynWrite editor, especially since it is much easier to navigate between the various routines.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I've said before that GCStudio is not for me either. It isn't that I don't appreciate the work that has gone into it and I hate to suggest to anyone that I might think that their 'baby' isn't the beautiful prince or handsome princess that the parents naturally see. It seems not just ungrateful, but downright blasphemous to say anything other than "ahhh...".
For all its faults and idiosyncrasies, I'm still using Geany and a few hand coded command lines to cover compiling and programming, along with the NSDSP programmer to perform the programming of the devices.
As to why I don't like it?
Mostly (and I think I said the same last time I was asked) it isn't Geany. When I used iMacs exclusively at home and at work, of the many editors I tried, Geany was the editor that stuck. The modern replacement for SynWrite (CudaText) was the next best, being better in many ways to Geany, but wasn't stable on macOS. Geany was almost as good and 99.9% stable, more stable than SynWrite is (or was) on the PC.
Secondly, it is MASSIVE. A large download and bloated, messy install. It has many dependancies that I don't feel a simple editor should.
CudaText is 15Mb.
Geany is 26Mb
GCStudio? 450Mb. Granted that does include the "core compiler", which contributes 30Mb out of those 450Mb.
Installed I seem to think it took over 1Gb .
Thirdly I felt (possibly incorrectly) that it was based on Visual Studio. Microsoft's software projects don't suit my thought processes. They seem (from my point of view) to go out of their way to hide what I consider to be simple functions underneath a confusing ribbon based, half baked menu complexity that makes simple tasks frustratingly long winded. Whosoever thought that removing a menu bar from program (sorry application) windows with structured menu options and commands (most with clearly visible keyboard strokes) and replacing it with a collapsible multi-tiered ribbon deserved to have their skin flayed from their body whilst listening to me rant for all of eternity. I still haven't found a simple method of recalculating an Excel spreadsheet that I'm sure was 'F5' in earlier versions. It was certainly 'F5' in the spreadsheet program I wrote. A program I'd still be using today if Microsoft hadn't decided that Object Linking and Embedding wasn't the future after all and deliberately broke it for all after Windows 7 or 8.
For me, I'll stick with Geany, I massively appreciate Angel's and Anobium's work, and I hate to be ungrateful but the core compiler and patches are more suited to me.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I see zero advantage in 'managing' an installation using another program. It makes no sense to me. It suggests buying a locomotive, when I have no track, to let me know when my bicycle has a puncture. I know it has a puncture, I'll put an innertube on myself.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Well, having not used the GCB PICInfo, I can't say what features are missing or what might have been improved upon. I know that a few of my suggestions were included and was more than grateful. Trev spent some time creating it and I always liked using it. I was disappointed when it was no longer included in GCB and kept my copy safe.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
It was included in GCB until the rewrite. The rewrite was required because the key database file was updated. At that point it was replaced with a supported version.
Be good if you could spend a few minutes do a compare and contrast. And, let me know the missing features.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Today I succeeded in installing and running the "Studio" ; for my usage I think there are too many functions which I would never use and destabilize me, I preferred the original GCB (I will go back with my Windows image ... )
Last edit: Bertrand BAROTH 2022-08-17
Can you help us (Angel and I) understand ?
The basic function keys and icons of F5 thru to F9 are the same.
And, you can select SynWrite as your default editor and still get the management benefits of Studio.
Indeed Studio is very powerful, perhaps even too much.
For more complex and large programs I always prefer to use the SynWrite editor, especially since it is much easier to navigate between the various routines.
The question is.
Maintaining two IDEs is not viable in the long term. Who is up to maintaining SynWrite as a supported IDE?
The work is very simple but it needs doing else SynWrite will fall behind.
When these steps are completed then Studio can merge the changes.
I've said before that GCStudio is not for me either. It isn't that I don't appreciate the work that has gone into it and I hate to suggest to anyone that I might think that their 'baby' isn't the beautiful prince or handsome princess that the parents naturally see. It seems not just ungrateful, but downright blasphemous to say anything other than "ahhh...".
For all its faults and idiosyncrasies, I'm still using Geany and a few hand coded command lines to cover compiling and programming, along with the NSDSP programmer to perform the programming of the devices.
As to why I don't like it?
Mostly (and I think I said the same last time I was asked) it isn't Geany. When I used iMacs exclusively at home and at work, of the many editors I tried, Geany was the editor that stuck. The modern replacement for SynWrite (CudaText) was the next best, being better in many ways to Geany, but wasn't stable on macOS. Geany was almost as good and 99.9% stable, more stable than SynWrite is (or was) on the PC.
Secondly, it is MASSIVE. A large download and bloated, messy install. It has many dependancies that I don't feel a simple editor should.
CudaText is 15Mb.
Geany is 26Mb
GCStudio? 450Mb. Granted that does include the "core compiler", which contributes 30Mb out of those 450Mb.
Installed I seem to think it took over 1Gb .
Thirdly I felt (possibly incorrectly) that it was based on Visual Studio. Microsoft's software projects don't suit my thought processes. They seem (from my point of view) to go out of their way to hide what I consider to be simple functions underneath a confusing ribbon based, half baked menu complexity that makes simple tasks frustratingly long winded. Whosoever thought that removing a menu bar from program (sorry application) windows with structured menu options and commands (most with clearly visible keyboard strokes) and replacing it with a collapsible multi-tiered ribbon deserved to have their skin flayed from their body whilst listening to me rant for all of eternity. I still haven't found a simple method of recalculating an Excel spreadsheet that I'm sure was 'F5' in earlier versions. It was certainly 'F5' in the spreadsheet program I wrote. A program I'd still be using today if Microsoft hadn't decided that Object Linking and Embedding wasn't the future after all and deliberately broke it for all after Windows 7 or 8.
For me, I'll stick with Geany, I massively appreciate Angel's and Anobium's work, and I hate to be ungrateful but the core compiler and patches are more suited to me.
I get Geany approach. Studio as the management tool for a Geany IDE is supported.
Any volunteers?
Personally (and again not wanting to seem ungrateful or over-critical) I don't want to 'manage' Geany using GCStudio. I simply want to use Geany.
Install Geany.
Install GCB compiler (compiler only).
Install Trev's PicInfo.
Install NSDSP command line tools.
Update as required, manually.
I see zero advantage in 'managing' an installation using another program. It makes no sense to me. It suggests buying a locomotive, when I have no track, to let me know when my bicycle has a puncture. I know it has a puncture, I'll put an innertube on myself.
PICinfo has been totally replaced and updated. The latest update is today.
Trev's version included some neat features in the last beta he sent me, and having had some input into it, it suits me well.
Do share the features. We may have included, or, not. If they are good features we should include.
Well, having not used the GCB PICInfo, I can't say what features are missing or what might have been improved upon. I know that a few of my suggestions were included and was more than grateful. Trev spent some time creating it and I always liked using it. I was disappointed when it was no longer included in GCB and kept my copy safe.
It was included in GCB until the rewrite. The rewrite was required because the key database file was updated. At that point it was replaced with a supported version.
Be good if you could spend a few minutes do a compare and contrast. And, let me know the missing features.