What's with the Dev-C++ hate?

It's probably just the fact that for many, many years, it was a buggy, outdated IDE with very few features.

Now, before you go into the whole "It's soooo outdated" argument, I would like to point out that Orwell Dev-C++ was just updated 3 days ago! I'd hardly call that outdated

For the record, constantly updated does not mean that it isn't outdated. I haven't used any of the new versions of Dev-C++ but if the new updates are only adding features that other IDEs had years ago (I'm not saying this is the case), then it would still be outdated, even though the features were newly added.

For the record, constantly updated does not mean that it isn't outdated. I haven't used any of the new versions of Dev-C++ but if the new updates are only adding features that other IDEs had years ago (I'm not saying this is the case), then it would still be outdated, even though the features were newly added.

Probably should clarify... It's being updated with NEW features to make it more usable, and is constantly being updated to accomodate for, and make better use of the newest compilers.

Probably should clarify... It's being updated with NEW features to make it more usable, and is constantly being updated to accomodate for, and make better use of the newest compilers.

Lucky that the "Dev-C++ hate" is not targeted at the Orwell IDE, but at the ancient Bloodshed one, then. In short, you are confusing the two (though I will admit if you simply say "Dev-C++" without specifying which version, people will probably tend to go with Bloodshed just to get a chance to bash you even if it is more logical to assume you are using the more recent one).

Do you like it? Does it work for you? If yes to both, then who cares what other people think?

Do you like it? Does it work for you? If yes to both, then who cares what other people think?

Because other people often have potentially important information that you do not.

Bloodshed Dev-C++ is the only one I'm aware of, and using it has been a terrible idea for years and years. I'm not familiar with the Orwell product. My generalized query to anyone using alternate IDEs, though, is why aren't you using Visual C++ Express? And I don't consider "it's too complicated" or "I don't like it" to be good reasons. I do consider "I need a GCC toolchain" to be a decent reason.

If anybody thinks using DevC++ is bad, just know that I use MinGWStudio. It's like DevC++ but with even less features, and more stability.

It looks like Orwell is a guy who made a branch of the old Bloodshed version which hasn't been maintained since 2005? I, for one, didn't even know that anyone was still maintaining it, but armed with this knowledge I continue to have no opinion on the matter.

My understanding is that for a while the old Dev-C++ was a pretty reasonable option for a free IDE, but it became pretty much completely obsolete around the time it stopped being maintained (which I think is also, not coincidentally, around the time Visual Studio Express first existed?). Maybe it's good again now. Obviously if someone's maintaining it regularly, then at least someone thinks it's filling a niche, but I wouldn't presume to know which niche that is.

Until about a few years ago, Dev C++ was buggy, lacking in features, and unsupported. That is, it hadn't seen an update in years, not even to fix bugs.

I learned programming using Dev C++, before I switched IDEs - it was my first IDE, and I used it for a good many years. I probably still have the original disc that game with C++ for Dummies that included it.

According to the official Dev C++ page, the last update (after I stopped using it), was in 2012 - two years ago. It's only a few minor versions higher than what I remember I was on.

There's been some unofficial forks where some users have been working on their version of Dev C++. I'm not sure how those have turned out, but they are probably what you are using if it says it was updated three days ago.

Now, before you go into the whole "It's soooo outdated" argument, I would like to point out that Orwell Dev-C++ was just updated 3 days ago! I'd hardly call that outdated.

There's a difference between "outdated" and "unsupported" (and for a while, when I finally switched to a new IDE, Dev C++ was both).

Something may be actively supported but still be outdated. Windows XP for example. It can still receive bugfixes, and even occasionally new features, but it's feature-set may still be miles behind more modern operating systems. Windows XP may still function perfectly fine! But "outdated" means there are very useful features that are ubiquitous with more modern software that the outdated software might be lacking, even if it is brand new software that was just released last night for the first time.

Have you tried QtCreator? Changing IDEs can take you a bit to get used to, and you might immediately "hate" many things that are merely different from what you are used to, but if you commit to trying a new one for several months you might get to learn what beneficial features you come to enjoy. You don't know a feature is "must-have" until you get used to the great convenience of having it.

Maybe modern Dev C++ forks are feature-complete and can hold their own against other IDEs; last I checked, it was lacking feature-wise, buggy, and unsupported, but the forks were trying to play catch-up by fixing the worst show-stopping bugs. Maybe they finally have caught up. Or maybe you ought to try other IDEs and compare.

The Perfectly Good can become outdated when The Better comes along. This was the case with Dev C++ when I finally worked up the courage to leave its warm comfortable familiarity to try to the scary cluttered unfamiliar IDEs.

You have to understand, Dev-C++ comes in three flavors Bloodshed Dev-C++ (not updated since February 2005), wxDev-C++ (outdated too I believe), and Orwell Dev-C++ (the latest and currently updated version). When people are hating on it, it is likely they are hating on Bloodshed's or possibly wxDev-C++ and most don't even know about Orwell's version.

Well, the other people basically covered everything already, but what I would like to say is that it just can't compete with the newest IDE's. It doesn't stand a chance. I mainly use C++ Builder XE6 for C++ programming and Delphi XE6 for Delphi Programming. I'm probably never going to use those old compilers and IDE's again.

You have to understand, Dev-C++ comes in three flavors Bloodshed Dev-C++ (not updated since February 2005), wxDev-C++ (outdated too I believe), and Orwell Dev-C++ (the latest and currently updated version). When people are hating on it, it is likely they are hating on Bloodshed's or possibly wxDev-C++ and most don't even know about Orwell's version.

And thus we see one of the big problems of forking a product but not changing the name.

I don't know about Orwell's version. I do know that the other two had many major bugs the developers would not fix, nor would they patch even though others submitted patches for them. They were not just major as in "this annoys the programmer", they were major as in "this uses a compiler that does not generate the intended functionality".

I do not know if the Orwell version is any better. Nor do I care, because there are so many other excellent products out there. There are free products with incredible track records that currently lead the pack in many different ways, but you are choosing to use something else.

That is your decision, but know that the "Dev-C++" name has more than a decade of stigma as everything was broken for some time and then the developers abandoned it; then another group forked it, made things worse, and abandoned their fork. Now a new group comes in to attempt to fix things, so it is unsurprising that people are at least wary of the product; more commonly the response will be an aggressive warning like "you are an idiot to use a known-broken tool". Sure, it is possible they have fixed everything and turned it into a best-of-class IDE. In that case they really ought to rename it and build a new brand.

Dev-C++ compared to MSVS is like a Ferrari compared to a Skoda. Lacking features.

I've been recommending against Dev-C++ since 2008 with this article, and my reasons (in line with those given by others in this topic) are outlined pretty clearly there. In 2012 I made a follow-up post on using updated (forked) versions, specifically looking at wxDev-C++ and Orwell Dev-C++ -- at the time I concluded that either option was acceptable if you really wanted to use it but that the more mature wxDev-C++ was probably the better of the two. If I were to look at them again I would probably now suggest that wxDev-C++ is unmaintained and out-of-date.

Want to avoid the hate? Just use the full title; mention up-front that you're using Orwell Dev-C++.

Advice against the other versions is good advice. Clarify that you're not using those versions and you'll avoid most of the problems -- and as an added bonus, you won't inadvertently lead beginners to the original Bloodshed version which still outranks Orwell for the term "Dev-C++" in searches.

Ok. So the general consensus is that even Orwell is lacking compared to modern IDEs... What I want to know is, what are the other features that I'm missing? I actively use Code::Blocks and VS and don't really notice anything missing in Dev compared to the other two...

Just adding to the chorus: it's not hate, it's pragmatism. If somebody's using a bad tool for the job, then you're actually doing them a favour by telling them so.

Ok. So the general consensus is that even Orwell is lacking compared to modern IDEs... What I want to know is, what are the other features that I'm missing? I actively use Code::Blocks and VS and don't really notice anything missing in Dev compared to the other two...

In my opinion, as long as the IDE has the basic features you need and you can upgrade to the latest version of your tool chain you should be okay. That was one of the chief problems with the original was that you were stuck with an ancient and buggy gcc toolchain.

Most of the circles I run in are full of OS X developers. I'm often the lone Linux or Windows user at the party. So whether I'm doing Node.js stuff on Linux or C# stuff on Windows, someone is complaining I'm not using Ruby on OS X. It doesn't even get as far as talking about IDEs.

So I just don't offer, because it's really not pertinent information, nor ever a worthwhile conversation. Either you get the work done or you don't, that's really all that matters. If you use something that most people don't use, unless you're Linux Tannenbaum himself, you're not going to make any converts by sharing. The *only* likely outcomes are A) most people will ignore you, or B) the people who don't ignore you will berate you. If there is literally no way for me to tell if you've used HTML++ with Variables as your programming language, then just don't bother offering that sort of information.

And when people start haranguing you to give them an answer on what you used, assess whether or not you think they are in the 0.1% of people who could be a contributor to your project, times the 0.1% of people who would be willing. The other 99.99% of people are just looking for an opening to ask you why you didn't use their darling language/framework/environment flavor of the month [1]. And again, that's just so not a worthwhile conversation.

[1] seriously, if I get another person asking me why I didn't use Angular or Bootstrap or whatever for a freaking Pong game, I'm going to walk away from them as rudely as I possibly can. Those people never make anything themselves anyway.

Ok. So the general consensus is that even Orwell is lacking compared to modern IDEs... What I want to know is, what are the other features that I'm missing? I actively use Code::Blocks and VS and don't really notice anything missing in Dev compared to the other two...

The main thing VS offers is a huge selection of plugins and good tools for static analysis, unit testing, refactoring and much more.

All the good stuff(including plugin support) is stripped out from the express edition though (Many professionals tend to recommend Visual Studio without realising that the free express edition really sucks quite hard)

You really want an IDE that supports plugins and has a decent selection of plugins available. (QTCreator and Code::Blocks are good, VS Express and Orwell-Dev-C++ are not)

The other major feature of VS is the huge superiority of Microsoft's debugger when compared to gdb.

gdb is like trying to explain electricity to a caveman. He just won't understand why he should use a superior tool, because "me caveman, me make fire, my fire all me need".