[Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

Christian Quast christian.quast at cquast-it.de
Mon Apr 4 15:28:32 CEST 2016

On Sunday 03 April 2016 14:41:51 Bob Hood wrote:
> But be aware that you're talking to somebody who has written whole 
> applications using nothing but vi and a command prompt.  I'm certainly
> not a  /connoisseur/of IDEs.  ;)

and I think this is the most important difference in ones opinion about 
QtCreator. If I remember correctly, its developers, at the very 
beginning, stated that they wanted to develop a lightweight IDE that is 
more a fancy text editor and, therefore, keeps out of your way.

I personally find it much more convenient to use than lets say 
VisualStudio or Eclipse (for me personally a totally overloaded IDE, 
just look at the right click menu). Than again, I currently develop 
using Kate (a 'simple' text editor) so my opinion is biased.

However, there, are some annoyances: for me the biggest is refactoring 
in VI mode (the most important feature of an editor ever! :) ), which 
got a lot better but its still not as good as without VI mode enabled. 

Also c++11 'auto' is confusing the IDE, but that might have changed 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/interest/attachments/20160404/af9edaec/attachment.sig>

More information about the Interest mailing list