Related
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I've had it of those dozens of editors which never provides simple things like:
distinguish type keywords and instruction keywords so I can put different colors on them.
being cross platform using a standard GUI lib like qt gtk etc (notepad++, yes, I almost hate you).
enough keyboard shortcut like duplicate line, comment selection, and a decent find-replace.
Decent task-easing features like single-click-on-the-number-line-margin to select the entire line.
Scintilla or another good-enough lexer that highlights enough different things, because brain-compiling code is one thing, quickly identify with the eyes what is what is something I find important.
I just want to support very basic languages like C, C++, maybe Python, not HTML or CSS.
Is Scintilla a good choice to just highlight those languages, and is a lexer really necessary ?
Isn't QT enough to program a text editor such as the one I want to do ? I know there is QScintilla, but is there a reason I shouldn't use a lib that integrates a lexer ? Why is Scintilla such a good lib ?
Is QT a good choice for such an editor ? (I also want to hard embed ProFont in the editor to kill any reluctant font problem between OSes).
EDIT:
In short, I want to make an editor, only with the same syntax highlight features of notepad++. That's my main goal, and the use of QScintilla might be a little harder than I thought...
EDIT2:
Well I found textadept, it's not so known but is quite awesome. I didn't manage to make my lexer, since I have other to do which I do under windows, unfortunately it's slow on the mac. Apparently there isn't any Scite official build for the mac.
C++ is not a "very basic language" by any stretch of the imagination.
Why do you really want to do this? There are SOOO many open source code editors out there.
If you must write your own editor, I suggest looking at the other open source editors and examine which pieces you port to your editor.
Porting pieces of existing working and tested code is usually much better than writing your own code and debugging it.
After perusing a couple serious open source editors: Emacs, Eclips, CodeBlocks, CodeLight, etc., I believe you will start changing your mind about writing an editor from scratch.
-- Thomas Matthews
My Info
If you really want to do this (and it sounds like a lot of work) I would look at ANTLR for parsing the code. You may get some ideas from their ANTLRWorks display.
To link the parse tree to a display could be a fair amount of work so I'd see what an IDE platform such as Eclipse has to offer
Are you OK with Java?
If so, go for Eclipse technologies: SWT and JFace. The latter provides you with org.eclipse.jface.text package with a lot of features. Then you can roll own editor easily basing on that. (I prefer Eclipse-based editors to Scintilla-based, I believe they tend to be more advanced and feature-rich, but that's my personal opinion.)
But then, you might want to go a step further and use the Eclipse RCP framework for you application... But then why not use the Eclipse IDE itself and just add whatever you want as plug-ins.
The Eclipse codebase is huge and it's up to you how much you want to reuse.
I would expend some effort experimenting with the emacs colour theme package and the various langauge modes; see if you can bend the lisp to do what you want. You almost certainly can. to my mind emacs and a bit of effort on your part will get you your ultimate editor (remember emacs is really just a DIY editor toolkit). If you cant bend emacs into the shape you want you will be well placed to expend the effort in writing your own.
I have tried to do something similar myself for a project I'm working on at the moment, I looked into the QScintilla and had to remove it from my project because when you embedded inside a QGraphicsView I can't control the resolution of the widgets image, it seems to paint the text as an image and that's what we see, I played with increasing the smoothness of the QFont and that improved it but still a no-go.
So I found a simple code editor inside QT's code base it comes with every installation of QT if you look
into:
C:\Qt\4.7.3\src\scripttools\debugging\qscriptedit.h
C:\Qt\4.7.3\src\scripttools\debugging\qscriptedit.cpp
If you go to the source code of OpenShapeFactory where I'm trying to embed a Code Editor: check how I got the syntax Highlighter and the autocomplete :
this widget uses the qscriptedit widget that ships with qt, you can add your own keywords to the syntax hightlighter from a file as well as for the auto-complete dropdownlist.
this is the header, scriptwidget.h and the implementation scriptwidget.cpp are available as part of the whole project code.
the next stage is to look into the QTCreator and see the code they already have all if not most of these features after you get to compile their version, just find where to add your little mods and you might be getting closer to the simple code editor.
I wish you the best of luck on this direction and if you find a solution please send it over, :)
heads-up keep a lookout for the repository link above, if I find a way of making it first, I might chase you to the answer.
Like everyone else is saying, it's probably more trouble than it's worth, but if you really want to do it, Qt's a good choice since it's cross platform. Use QSyntaxHighlighter to do your keyword/type highlighting, and take full advantage Qt's support for keyboard shortcuts.
use something like C, QT and Lua for the scripting engine.
A few colleagues and I created a simple packet capturing application based on libpcap, GTK+ and sqlite as a project for a Networks Engineering course at our university. While it (mostly) works, I am trying to improve my programming skills and would appreciate it if members of the community could look at what we've put together.
Is this a good place to ask for such a review? If not, what are good sites I can throw this question up on? The source code is hosted by Google Code (http://code.google.com/p/nbfm-sniffer) and an executable is available for download (Windows only, though it does compile on Linux and should compile on OS X Leopard as well provided one has gtk+ SDK installed).
Thanks, everyone!
-Carlos Nunez
UPDATE: Thanks for the great feedback, everyone. The code is completely open-source and modifiable (licensed under Apache License 2.0). I was hoping to get more holistic feedback, considering that my postings would still be very lengthy.
As sheepsimulator mentioned, GitHub is good. I would also recommend posting your project on SourceForge.net and/or FreshMeat.net. Both are active developer communities where people often peruse projects like yours. The best thing for your code would be if someone found it useful and decided to extend it. Then, you'd probably end up with plenty of bug fixes and constructive criticism.
You might get some mileage by posting the code out in the public space (through github or some other open-posting forum), putting a link here on SO, and seeing what happens.
You could also make it an open-source project, and see if people find it and use it.
Probably your best bet is to talk to your prof/classmates, find some professional programmers willing to devote their time, and have them review the code. Like American Idol-esque judging, but for your software...
As #Noah states, this is not the site for code review. You may present problems and what you did to overcome those problems, asking if a given solution would be the best.
I found a neat little website that might be what you are looking for: Cplusplus.com
I am looking for a spell checker for c++ source code. Unfortunately all I can find is Visual Studio specific. I would like something which works on Linux.
Edit:
Ultimately I want to automate it in some way. I am not very proficient in spell checking, but what I am thinking of is a not-interactive console tool which prints error messages, or something like that.
Personally I use vim, but not everyone on the project does of course.
Currently we are using svn so it is possible to integrate it into the pre-commit-hook maybe?
Don't you guys do something similar?
Eclipse (Java based so will do mac, linux etc.) has spellcheckers built in. With the CDT plugin you can edit and build C++ code.
Vim also supports spell checking.
See the other question for more.
Emacs too has spell checking, flyspell-prog-mode, is the one I use, it is a (very!) personal preference which one works best for you.
The automating the spell check idea is a much trickier one. The best you can hope for is one that will tell you if there are spelling errors. That's trickier than it sounds, especially with code comments which may have all sorts of valid abbreviations which are not real words.
Having a company policy that whatever people have their EDITOR environment variable set to has a spell check enabled, should cut down on the spelling errors in commit messages, for example.
I found something!
svn co svn://anonsvn.kde.org/home/kde/trunk/quality/krazy2 krazy2
this is part of the quality management of KDE.
Besides a multitude of checks (KDE-specific, qt-specific, cpp-specific, ...) there is automated spell checking.
hope this helps
Which editors do you use? Many of them have spell checking abilities. E.g., gedit just needs to have the spellcheck plugin enabled.
You can check out some alpha code I just whipped up for a similar purpose: pyspellcode. It's Zlib licensed and uses clang and hunspell.
No idea how pyspellcode compares to what KDE does/provides but am happy to receive comparisons and will prioritize its development more if there's interest it.
At just over 200 lines, I'm guessing pyspellcode is at least lighter weight than KDE's solution though KDE's solution I imagine is way more tested.
For those who are using vim/emacs/terminals,etc (ie, not an IDE proper) what sort of projects are you working on? Are they big? Production? Are these the tools you use at work? Or mostly for smaller things...or big things broken into small things? Sorry...enough questions.
I ask because I'm studying computer science right now, and am super excited about it. I had an internship programming J2ME for a government agency recently and it was Netbeans and eclipse all the way. So I've only had a few "minor-league" years in the business.
In short, what is practical for the CL type tools, versus an IDE such as 'beans and VS. I've got a lot to learn, and the CL tools will probably teach me, versus shielding me like an full on IDE might.
What sort of projects are you working on?
All kind... vim is my main "IDE" anywhere
Are they big?
Yes... My FOSS project CppCMS written almost 100% in vim
Production?
Yes, most of production code (Not FOSS) I write today I use vim.
Are these the tools you use at work?
Yes.
I would explain severak simple things:
vim provides almost all tools IDE does, highlighting, spellcheck, autocomplition, working with multiple buffers, build, context "jumps" (decl, def) and much more
It is extreamly portable, I work with it on Windows, Linux, OpenVMS, Solaris, FreeBSD.
It is very light in comparison to bloated IDE.
There is only one thing I do use IDE today: debugging hard bugs.
Emacs/Vim can be used for any sized projects.
Generally, you won't get to choose the environment, the job you find will have one already picked out for you (unless it's non-Java programming in Unix, in which case use what you want).
I wouldn't sweat the choice, just learn to use which ever editor/IDE is available to its utmost extent.
I use (and have used) Emacs for personal projects, and in two different companies on software projects exceeding 10M lines of production code each.
I use emacs. I would recommend emacs. I have used emacs since before it was emacs: TECO, TV, and the e macro package on the Decsystem-20.
I can use vim if I need to but what you learn is largely what is at hand and you get into.
Yes, learn one or both. And I would say, if the IDE fits, wear it too.
I use vim for everything, I hate IDEs, they're too bloated for me.
I haven't used it for any massive projects (because I haven't written any massive projects), but if I were going to, I would still use vim.
When learning I new language, I believe it's best to not use IDEs at all, and to learn the "proper" way of doing it (like for c++, learning the command line switches and using makefiles).
Twenty years ago all my programming was done in plain text editors, mostly emacs, but technology has improved over the years.
I still do use plain text editors to write code occasionally, but only when it is inconvenient to install an IDE on the machine where I'm writing code. For example, a few times I've stopped by a client site without my laptop and wanted to write a quick program.
This is also an issue with certain embedded systems, where you may want to update the code interactively through a RS232 or USB based command line interface.
Most modern IDEs provide enough acceleration to the code editing process that I will install one whenever I expect to use the computer for development for more than two or three hours.
I use vim for everything from small one-off scripts to 1000+ line production code. It is so versatile that working in any other environment seems constricting. If I'm part of a project that necessitates a standard environment (IDE) then I'll do as much coding as I can in vim and then import into the ide.
I believe everyone should be able to operate effectively in a command-line environment. You can't always be sure that anything except the basic tools will be available on the target machines, you can't be sure that you'll have enough system to pull up a full IDE, and you might actually find the system you're building is too complicated for an IDE.
I've built systems that have consisted of multiple interoperating clients and servers distributed across multiple physical machines. In these efforts, I have used command line tools almost exclusively in the server side. I will use DDD when I can, but I also know the underlying gdb. If the clients are Windows, I'll use the Visual Studio IDE, but if they're UNIX, I'll go with the command line.
Figure out how to work effectively using minimal tools. You'll be a better developer and you'll actually appreciate the integrated tools more, if they're done better.
BTW, I put Emacs in the IDE class. I've got a friend who comes in and fires it up first thing and doesn't leave the environment all day. It's more than an IDE, in fact, since he does mail, surfing, etc. in the thing, or so he tells me.
For large projects with 100+ files, using an IDE is very important. But there are lots of small small things which you need to keep doing all the time while working on even large projects. Firing up the IDE for all of these may not be worthwhile. Having a good command on a powerful editor like Vim or Emacs is something I would consider as an essential skill for any programmer. But an appropriate IDE should also be used to accelerate regular development work as per project needs.
Hmm... Well, look at it this way:
I open code in emacs. I edit it. I use code completion (and I've even played with intellisense emacs)... When I'm ready to compile, I hit CTRL+F7... A key I've bound... It builds in a small popup window... If there are any errors, I can jump to them in the code by hitting f8 (another bound key)... Once it's all building, I hit f5... (this runs a little program I wrote that parses the Makefile and determines the path the executable)... This starts the debugger in a small popup window... I can click on code lines to set break points... etc... I debug... I can "next" through the code with F10... I can "step" through the code with F11 (more key bindings)... When it's all done I hit Shift-F7 to package (.rpm) the project.
So, do I have an IDE? Or am I just using a plain text editor?
1. Yes. 2. Any kind of project.
There is no limit to the size of a system that can be developed in Vim/Emacs/Unix, in fact, there are fewer limits than there are in IDE's. Let's look at a few things I use...
SYSTEM LINES OF CODE
Linux kernel 10,000,000
NetBSD 4,000,000
Ruby 200,000
Those are pretty big systems.
I don't believe any of them were developed with IDE software.
I tend to agree that for learning it is a good idea to understand the basics: the fact that you edit the code, you compile it with a compiler, link it with a linker, debug it with a debugger.
It makes it easier to grasp the concepts. And it makes easier to move from platform to platform.
So, learn vi, make, gdb, some version control system (git, svn).
But for production I would say that getting familiar with the "standard IDE" of the environment is a must (Visual Studio for Windows, XCode for Mac OS, Eclipse for Java, etc.)
No mater what other say, mastering an IDE will increase your productivity.
If you used vi/emacs for 10 years and try Eclipse or Visual Studio for few days, you will say that they are bloated and don't offer anything in exchange. That's BS. The more open minded you are, the better you will be.
I use Emacs to develop commercial software with size of several millions LoC, and massive use of templates, etc. I use CEDET + gnu global as auxiliary packages + yasnippet, etc.
well...I have to say that I'm a vimmer. Using a IDE, I don't to care so many things like when you use editor like vim/emacs. But when you do a bit more, you will find the IDE you use is more hindering than helping in your program developping process. alas...if you insist in using vim/emacs as your editor, you will encounter "a deep learning curve", you will waste so many time even to acchieve so trivial a function in your editor,you will be desperate when you are busy catching up with your timetable if you just pick them up......you have to settle down and start leaning and also playing with editors and a couple of days, you will find you've already achieve more than you can ever expect!
My standard IDE is a flock of xterms running some mix of vim editors, man page documentation, debuggers, log tails, and command lines to execute things, plus an instance of Firefox for pulling up additional docs or (where applicable) testing web-based code. This is what I use for all projects these days, regardless of size, whether personal or professional.
Pretty much the only time I've seen real benefit to using an IDE has been when I've been working on platform-native GUI apps, where they make it so much easier to build forms and wire up their controls. But I haven't done that sort of work in over a decade - the last one I did was in Deplhi, back when Borland still owned it; I think version 4 had just come out, although it might have been 3.
Emacs is a great tool (so is Vim) for programming, and I use them to develop my code for physics research. As added benefit (for me) Emacs handles remote files nicely via Tramp, so that's big boom for me since I very often have to visit remote servers.
With that said, every time I need to write an application with a GUI and within a large framework (like c# with .NET or the android framework) I always find it hard to development with just emacs. The IDEs (Visual Studio, Eclipse) simply have everything including autocomplete and lookup with appropriate content from the framework, and debugging, even though code writing part is always unsatisfactory (I always end up installing some sort of emacs plugin for the IDE, which always fall short of Emacs proper!).
Sometimes it just takes too long to setup an environment in Emacs for those kinds of projects since that is not the default way envisioned by the designers, and having an environment that works out of box is so much easier than banging my head against the wall to find usually obscure information on how to compile/debug those app without using the designated IDE.
We could sum things up by saying that editors like emacs / vi implements some of the functionnalities of IDEs by using CL tools (or the libs behind the CL tools).
Your main issue in using an editor as an IDE would be :
configuring it to have exactly the functionnalities you are happy with in an IDE is not necessarily straigh-forward (I ask for sympathy from anyone who ever tried to configure CEDET ;) ), as opposed to working out-of-the-box with IDEs
the way such functionnalities work in editors is very tied to CL, so you need at least a vague understanding of the CL beforehand.
The advantages are the fact that CL tools are sometimes more ubiquitous than IDEs. Also mastering CL opens the door to scripting your build ("make a build in one command" as opposed to "make a build in one click"), which opens the door to automated nighly builds, continuous integration, etc... all of which are harder to setup if your understanding of the build stops at hitting F6 or whatever.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
Briefly: Does anyone know of a GUI for gdb that brings it on par or close to the feature set you get in the more recent version of Visual C++?
In detail: As someone who has spent a lot of time programming in Windows, one of the larger stumbling blocks I've found whenever I have to code C++ in Linux is that debugging anything using commandline gdb takes me several times longer than it does in Visual Studio, and it does not seem to be getting better with practice. Some things are just easier or faster to express graphically.
Specifically, I'm looking for a GUI that:
Handles all the basics like stepping over & into code, watch variables and breakpoints
Understands and can display the contents of complex & nested C++ data types
Doesn't get confused by and preferably can intelligently step through templated code and data structures while displaying relevant information such as the parameter types
Can handle threaded applications and switch between different threads to step through or view the state of
Can handle attaching to an already-started process or reading a core dump, in addition to starting the program up in gdb
If such a program does not exist, then I'd like to hear about experiences people have had with programs that meet at least some of the bullet points.
Does anyone have any recommendations?
Edit:
Listing out the possibilities is great, and I'll take what I can get, but it would be even more helpful if you could include in your responses:
(a) Whether or not you've actually used this GUI and if so, what positive/negative feedback you have about it.
(b) If you know, which of the above-mentioned features are/aren't supported
Lists are easy to come by, sites like this are great because you can get an idea of people's personal experiences with applications.
Eclipse CDT will provide an experience comparable to using Visual Studio. I use Eclipse CDT on a daily basis for writing code and debugging local and remote processes.
If you're not familiar with using an Eclipse based IDE, the GUI will take a little getting used to. However, once you get to understand the GUI ideas that are unique to Eclipse (e.g. a perspective), using the tool becomes a nice experience.
The CDT tooling provides a decent C/C++ indexer that allows you to quickly find references to methods in your code base. It also provides a nice macro expansion tool and limited refactoring support.
With regards to support for debugging, CDT is able to do everything in your list with the exception of reading a core dump (it may support this, but I have never tried to use this feature). Also, my experience with debugging code using templates is limited, so I'm not sure what kind of experience CDT will provide in this regard.
For more information about debugging using Eclipse CDT, you may want to check out these guides:
Interfacing with the CDT debugger, Part 2: Accessing gdb with the Eclipse CDT and MI
CDT Debug Tutorial
gdb -tui works okay if you want something GUI-ish, but still character based.
You won't find anything overlaying GDB which can compete with the raw power of the Visual Studio debugger. It's just too powerful, and it's just too well integrated inside the IDE.
For a Linux alternative, try DDD if free software is your thing.
Check out Nemiver C/C++ Debugger. It is easy to install in Ubuntu (Developer Tools/Debugging).
Update: New link.
Qt Creator seems like good stuff. A colleague showed me one way set it up for debugging:
Create a new project, "Import of Makefile-based Project".
Point it to your root project folder (it will index sources under it, and it is impressively fast).
Go to project settings and add a run configuration, then specify the executable you want to debug, and its arguments.
Qt Creator seems to insist on building your project before debugging it. If you don't want that, or don't use make, just go to projects -> build (Left panel), then, on the right panel in "Build Steps", remove all the steps, including the step by default when you created the project.
That may seem like a bit much work for debugging an app I had already compiled, but it is worth it. The debugger shows threads, stacks and local variables in a similar way to Visual Studio and even uses many of the same keyboard shortcuts. It seems to handle templates well, at least std::string and std::map. Attaching to existing processes and core dumps seems to be supported, though I haven't tested it yet.
Keep in mind that I used it for less than and hour now, but I'm impressed so far.
I loathe the idea of Windows development, but the VC++ debugger is among the best I've seen. I haven't found a GUI front end that comes close to the VC one.
GDB is awesome once you really get used to it. Use it in anger enough and you'll become very proficient. I can whiz around a program doing all the things you listed without much effort anymore. It did take a month or so of suffering over a SSH link to a remote server before I was proficient. I'd never go back though.
DDD is really powerful but it was quite buggy. I found it froze up quite often when it got messages from GDB that it didn't grok. It's good because it has a gdb interface window so you can see what's going on and also interact with gdb directly. DDD can't be used on a remote X session in my environment (a real problem, since I'm sitting at a thin client when I do Unix dev) for some reason so it's out for me.
KDevelop followed typical KDE style and exposed EVERYTHING to the user. I also never had any luck debugging non KDevelop programs in KDevelop.
The Gnat Programming Studio (GPS) is actually quite a good front-end to GDB. It doesn't just manage Ada projects, so it's worth trying out if you are in need of a debugger.
You could use Eclipse, but it's pretty heavy weight and a lot of seasoned Unix people I've worked with (me included) don't care much for its interface, which won't just STFU and get out of your way. Eclipse also seems to take up a lot of space and run like a dog.
I use cgdb, simple and usefull
I use DDD a lot, and it's pretty powerful once you learn to use it. One thing I would say is don't use it over X over the WAN because it seems to do a lot of unnecessary screen updates.
Also, if you're not mated to GDB and don't mind ponying up a little cash, then I would try TotalView. It has a bit of a steep learning curve (it could definitely be more intuitive), but it's the best C++ debugger I've ever used on any platform and can be extended to introspect your objects in custom ways (thus allowing you to view an STL list as an actual list of objects, and not a bunch of confusing internal data members, etc.)
I used KDbg (only works under KDE).
Check out the Eclipse CDT project. It is a plugin for Eclipse geared towards C/C++ development and includes a fairly feature rich debugging perspective (that behind the scenes uses GDB). It is available on a wide variety of platforms.
DDD is the GNU frontend for gdb: http://www.gnu.org/software/ddd/
Similar comfortable to the eclipse gdb frontend is the emacs frontend, tightly tied to the emacs IDE. If you already work with emacs, you will like it:
GDB Emacs Frontend
Qt Creator-on-Linux is certainly on par with Visual Studio-on-Windows for C++ nowadays. I'd even say better on the debugger side.
I've tried a couple of different guis for gdb and have found DDD to be the better of them.
And while I can't comment on other, non-gdb offerings for linux I've used a number of other debuggers on other platforms.
gdb does the majority of the things that you have in your wish list. DDD puts a nicer front on them. For example thread switching is made simpler. Setting breakpoints is as simple as you would expect.
You also get a cli window in case there is something obscure that you want to do.
The one feature of DDD that stands out above any other debugger that I've used is the data "graphing". This allows you to display and arrange structures, objects and memory as draggable boxes. Double clicking a pointer will open up the dereferenced data with visual links back to the parent.
There's one IDE that is missing in this list and which is very efficient (I've used it in many C/C++ projects without any issues): Netbeans.
What can be stepped through is going to be limited by the debugging information that g++ produces, to a large extent. Emacs provides an interface to gdb that lets you control it via the toolbars/menus and display data in separate windows, as well as type gdb commands directly. Eclipse's CDT provides similar tools. I've heard of Anjuta and Code::Blocks but never used them.
As someone familiar with Visual Studio, I've looked at several open source IDE's to replace it, and KDevelop comes the closest IMO to being something that a Visual C++ person can just sit down and start using. When you run the project in debugging mode, it uses gdb but kdevelop pretty much handles the whole thing so that you don't have to know it's gdb; you're just single stepping or assigning watches to variables.
It still isn't as good as the Visual Studio Debugger, unfortunately.
Have you ever taken a look at DS-5 debugger?
There is a paid version which includes a lot of helpful features, but you can also use Community Edition for free (which is also quite useful especially for embedded systems).
I have a positive experience with this tool when debugging Android applications on real device using eclipse.
You don't mention whether you are using Windows or UNIX.
On UNIX systems, KDevelop is good but I use KDbg because it is easy to use and will also work with apps not developed in KDevelop.
Eclipse is good on both platforms.
On Windows, there is a great package called Wascana Desktop Developer which is Eclipse CDT and MinGW all packaged up and preconfigured nicely for the minimum of pain. Its the best thing I've found for developing GNU code on Windows.
I have used all these debuggers and none of them are as good as MS Dev Studio. Eclipse/Wascana is probably the closest but it does have limitations like you cannot step into DLLs and it doesn't do as good a job at examining variables.
The Code:Blocks C++ IDE has a graphical wrapper, with a few of the features you want, but nothing like the power of VS.
VisualGDB is another Visual Studio plugin to develop and debug applications on linux and embedded platforms.
KDevelop works pretty well.
Have you tried gdb -w with cygwin gdb.
It is supossed to have a windows interface which works fairly well.
The only problem I found is that on my present machine it didn't run that way until after I installed ddd. I suspect that it requires tcltk which was installed when I installed ddd.
Latest version of Geany supports it (only on Linux, though)
If you are looking for gdb under Visual Studio, then check WinGDB.
In the last 15 months I use insight (came with FC6). It is not great, it is written in Tcl/Tk, but it is simple and useful. DDD is of similar quality / utility, but somewhat harder to use (various GUI gotchas and omissions). I also tried to integrate gdb with my IDE, SlickEdit. It worked OK (I played some 4 hours with it), but I did not like the GUI context switches. I like my IDE to remain unchanged while I am debugging; on Windows I use SlickEdit for IDE and Visual Studio Debugger for debugging. So from the 3: Insight, DDD and SlickEdit, Insight is my 1st choice, I use it >95% of the time, command-line gdb and DDD make up the other 5%. If I get the chance, I will eval Eclipse at some point, my work PC does not seem to have enough RAM (1GB only) to run Eclipse reasonably well.
I have also heard a lot of praise for TotalView, including 1st hand during a job interview. I obtained an eval for our company in late 2008, but in the end we did not proceed as gdb was good enough for our needs; and it is free and ubiquitous.
Use www.zero-bugs.com/
Zero debugger, it requires C++0x support from gcc
I was searching for a debugger to step through a running programm. Say: Attach. The programm was build with eclipse, but because of maybe some multithreadding obstrucles, no sourcefiles where fond. What ever.
I got very compfortable with NetBeans.
[debug] from menu -> Attach Deugger...
as process chose the one to debug
as project [new project]
Now the window disappars and you see nothing. detach from the process. The Read Square "Stop" helps.
import source from the project as e.g. folder. ".../MyProject/src
Now it appears in your project, and you can set breakpoints.
again ttach debugger
chose the process to debug.
debugger should stop if programm reaches next breakpoint.
Going to [window] -> [Debugging] -> Will your window make compfortable.