Path: chuka.playstation.co.uk!news From: Craig Graham Newsgroups: scee.yaroze.beginners,scee.yaroze.freetalk.english Subject: Re: What's the point of CodeWarrior ?? Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1998 18:46:10 +0100 Organization: Intelligent Research Lines: 93 Message-ID: <35B38262.186E232A@hinge.mistral.co.uk> References: <35AFC525.5495@virgin.net> <6opmgn$ofp17@chuka.playstation.co.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.131.235.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.03 [en] (Win95; I) Xref: chuka.playstation.co.uk scee.yaroze.beginners:440 scee.yaroze.freetalk.english:1482 **** Craig yawns, flexs his muscles, bares his teeth a little and rips into **** this topic yet again...wish folks read up the old posts on this subject. Mark Wilson wrote: > >What a pile of cack! Cack? Where's your evidance? >There's nothing there that I can't do from DOS. Dead code stripping & call tree analysis. Optimisation that works. Understandable inline assembler syntax. FileServer (though my view on this is mixed, I prefer ARS for it's speed). GUI Debugger. IDE that isn't (contrary to popular myth) as bad as all that. C++. Generates full on playstation EXE format (for those who want that). > >Granted, I have coding experience and am familiar with makefiles, Not much obviously ;) > >projects and also change control, but to fork out £90 for a glorified > >(bad) editor, with a Yaroze comms program only marginally easier to use The yaroze version editor is buggy, yes. They sorted the IDE out on thePro version about 6monthes ago, no more dodgy characters and stuff. Perhaps if enough people mail them they'll do an IDE update for the yaroze compiler that provides the same fixes. > >than SIOCONS, I feel is a complete waste. (sorry for the long sentence - > >bad grammar an' all). The comms program also includes their fileserver code. I suggest you check out what the ProDev version (which isn't that far ahead of the Yaroze one) costs. The differance is measured in thousands. And Metrowerks aren't overcharging for it in context. Several companys charge much more than that: eg. Microtec 68000 dev tools for embedded systems: £1000 for the C compiler + assembler £1000 for the C++ compiler (requires the C/assembler package) £1500 for the debugger (and you have to port the monitor program yourself which is a bugger even for experienced 68K experts) > The only reason I see for using CodeWarrior is the debugger, which beats the > GNU one hands down. The rest of the system ranges between merely acceptable > and downright incompetent. The debugger is a big step beyond the GNU one. The rest of the systemis actually rather good. The compiler itself is very fast compared to GNU, and the code browsing stuff is excellent (better in many respects than the Microsoft IDE). > >Unfortunately, I think there's a two week return period for CodeWarrior, > >hence, even though I don't use this product, there's no way for me to > >get my money back! > > > > I thought it was thirty days? > > >Let this be a warning for those who're thinking of buying it - the IDE's > >a bit crap and the only reason to get it is if you can't suss out > >makefiles. Or you want a much better dev system than the GNU compiler. > Hmm, ok that's another good reason in CWs favour. I can suss out makefiles, > and have used them for many years, but they're a major pain in the bum... A > project system is much simpler. > I could go on, but my view's are on record already - I notice that mostpeople who complain that the IDE is holding them back (and one guy blamed the whole fact he couldn't code on a yaroze on the IDE not working the same as VC++), tend to be the same people who don't produce or release anything. Or do anything else but whine on and on about CW being crap. It's cheap - stop being so wet and get on with it. > Mark Craig. (fed up of whinges on this subject - why not whinge at the lack of a fileserver that works via serial for GNU instead?)