Related
Seldom during working on large scale projects, suddenly you are moved on to a project which is already in maintainance phase.You end up with having a huge code C/C++ code base on your hands, with not much doccumentation about the design.The last person who could give you some knowledge transfer about the code has left the company already and to add to your horrors there is not enough time to get acquainted with the code and develop an understanding of the overall module/s.In this scenario when you are expected to fix bugs(core dumps,functionality,performance problems etc) on the module/s what is the approach that you will take?
So the question is:
What are your usual steps for debugging a not so familiar C/C++ code base when trying to fix a bug?
EDIT: Enviornment is Linux, but code is ported on Windows too so suggestions for both will be helpful.
If possible, step through it from main() to the problematic area, and follow the execution path. Along the way you'll get a good idea of how the different parts play together.
It could also be helpful to use a static code analysis tool, like CppDepends or even Doxygen, to figure out the relations between modules and be able to view them graphically.
Use a pen and paper, or images/graphs/charts in general, to figure out which parts belong where and draw some arrows and so on.
This helps you build and see the image that will then be refined in your mind as you become more comfortable with it.
I used a similar approach attacking a hellish system that had 10 singletons all #including each other. I had to redraw it a few times in order to fit everything, but seeing it in front of you helps.
It might also be useful to use Graphviz when constructing dependency graphs. That way you only have to list everything (in a text file) and then the tool will draw the (often unsightly) picture. (This is what I did for the #include dependencies in above syste,)
As others have already suggested, writing unit-tests is a great way to get into the codebase. There are a number of advantages to this approach:
It allows you to test your
assumptions about how the code
works. Adding a passing test proves
that your assumptions about that
small piece of code that you are
testing are correct. The more
passing tests you write, the better
you understand the code.
A failing unit test that reproduces
the bug you want to fix will pass
when you fix the bug and you know
that you have succeeded.
The unit tests that you write act as
documentation for the future.
The unit tests you write act as
regression tests as more bugs are
fixed.
Of course adding unit tests to legacy code is not always an easy task. Happily, a gentleman by the name of Michael Feathers has written an excellent book on the subject, which includes some great 'recipes' on adding tests to code bases without unit tests.
Some pointers:
Debug from the part which seems more
relevant to the workflow.
Use debug
strings
Get appropriate .pdb and attach the
core dump in debuggers like Windbg
or debugdiag to analyze it.
Get a person's help in your
organization who is good at
debugging. Even if he is new to your
codebase, he could be very helpful.
I had prior experience. They would
give you valuable pointers.
Per Assaf Lavie's advice, you could use static code analyzers.
The most important thing: as you
explore and debug, document
everything as you progress. At least
the person succeeding you would
suffer less.
Three things i don't see yet:
write some unit tests which use the libraries/interfaces. demonstrate/verify your understanding of them and promote their maintainability.
sometimes it is nice to create an special assertion macro to check that the other engineer's assumptions are in line with yours. you could:
not commit their uses
commit their uses, converting them to 'real' assertions after a given period
commit their uses, allowing another engineer (more familiar with the project) to dispose or promote them to real assertions
refactoring can also help. code that is difficult to read is an indication.
The first step should be try to read the code. Try to see the code where the bug is. Follow the code from main to that point ans try to see what could be wrong. Read the comments from the code(if any). Normally the function names are useful. Understand what each function does.
Once you get some idea of the code then you can start debugging the code. Put breakpoints where you don't understand the code or where you think the error can be. Start following the code line by line. Debugging is like sex. Initially painful, but slowly you start to enjoy it.
cscope + ctags are available on both Linux and Windows (via Cygwin). If you give them a chance, these tools will become indispensable to you. Although, IDEs like Visual Studio also do an excellent job with code browsing facilities as well.
In a situation like yours, because of time constraints, you are driven by symptoms. I mean that you don't have time to reconstruct the big picture / design / architecture. So you focus on the symptoms and work outwards, and each time reconstruct as much of the big picture as you need for that particular problem. But do not make "local" decisions in a hurry. Have the patience to see as much of the big picture as needed to make a good quality decision. And don't get caught in the band-aid syndrome i.e. put any old fix in that will work. It is your job to preserve the underlying architecture / design (if there is one, and to whatever extent that you can discover it).
It will be a struggle at first, as your mind "hunts" excessively. But soon the main themes in the design / architecture will emerge, and all of it will start to make sense. Think, by not thinking, grasshoppa :)
You have to have a fully reliable IDE which has a lot of debbugging tools (breakpoints, watches, and the like). The best way to familiarize yourself with a huge code is to play around with it and see how data is passed from one method to another. Also, you can reverse engineer the code so could see the relationship of the classes. :D Good Luck!
For me, there is only one way to get to know a process - Interaction. Identify the interfaces of the process/system. Then identify the input/output relationship (these steps maybe not linear). Once you do that, you can start tinkering at the code with a fair amount of confidence because you know what it is "supposed to do" then it's just a matter of finding out "how it is actually being done". For me though, getting to know the interface (Not necessarily the user interface) of the system is the key. To put it bluntly - Never touch the code first!!!
Not sure about C/C++, but coming from Java and C#, unit testing will help. In Java there's JUnit and TestNG libraries for unit testing, in C# there's NUnit and mstest. Not sure about C/C++.
Read the book 'Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code' by Martin Fowler, Kent Beck, et al. Will be quite a few tips in there I'm sure that will help, and give you some guidance to improving the code.
One tip: if it aint broke, don't fix it. Don't bother trying to fix some library or really complicated function if it works. Focus on parts where there's bugs.
Write a unit test to reproduce the scenario where the code should work. The test will fail at first. Fix the code until the unit test passes successfully. Repeat :)
Once a majority of your code, the important bits that are too complex to manually debug and fix, is under automated unit tests, you'll have a safety harness of regression tests that'll make you feel more confident at changing the existing code base.
while (!codeUnderstood)
{
Breakpoints();
Run();
StepInto();
if(needed)
{
StepOver();
}
}
I don't try to get an overview of the whole system as suggested by many here. If there is something which needs fixing I learn the smallest part of the code I can to fix the bug. The next time there is an issue I'm a little more familiar and a little less daunted and I learn a little more. Eventually I'm able to support the whole shebang.
If management suggests I do a major change to something I'm not familiar with I make sure they understand the time scales and if things a really messy suggest a rewrite.
Usually the program in question will produce some kind of output ( log, console printout, dialog box ).
Find the closest place to your
problem in the program output
Search through the code base and look for the text in that output
Start putting your own printouts, nothing fancy, just printf( "Calling xxx\n" );, so you can pinpoint exactly to the point where the problem starts.
Once you pinpointed the problem spot, put a breakpoint
When you hit the breakpoint, print a stacktrace
Now you can see what players you have and start the analysis of how you've got to the wrong place.
Hopefully the names of the methods on the call stack are more meaningful than a, b and c ( seen this ), and there is some sort of comments, method documentation more meaningful than calling a ( seen this many times ).
If the source is poorly documented, don't be afraid to leave your comments once you have figured out what's going on. If program design permits it create a unit test for the problem you've fixed.
Thanks for the nice answers, quite a number of points to take up. I have worked on such situation a number of times and here is the usual procedure i follow:
Check the crash log or trace log. Check relevant trace if just a simple developer mistake if cannot evaluate in one go, then move on to 2.
Reproduce the bug! This is the most important thing to do. Some bugs are rare to occur and if you get to reproduce the bug nothing like it. It means you have a better % of cracking it.
If you cant reproduce a bug, find a alternative use case, situation where in you can actually reproduce the bug. Being able to actually debug a scenario is much more useful than just the crash log.
Head to version control! Check if the same buggy behavior exists on previous few SW versions. If NOT..Voila! You can find between what two versions the bug got introduced and You can easily get the code difference of the two versions and target the relevant area.(Sometimes it is not the newly added code which has the bug but it exposes some old leftovers.Well, We atleast have a start I would say!)
Enable the debug traces. Run the use case of the bug, check if you can find some additional information useful for investigation.
Get hold of the relevant code area through the trace log. Check out there for some code introducing the bug.
Put some breakpoints in the relevant code. Study the flow. Check the data flows.Lookout for pointers(usual culprits). Repeat till you get a hold of the flow.
If you have a SW version which does not reproduce the bug, compare what is different in the flows. Ask yourself, Whats the difference?
Still no Luck!- Arghh...My tricks have exhausted..Need to head the old way. Understand the code..and understand the code and understand it till you know what is happening in the code when that particular use case is being executed.
With newly developed understanding try debugging the code and sure the solution is around the corner.
Most important - Document the understanding you have developed about the module/s. Even small knitty gritty things. It is sure going to help you or someone just like you, someday..sometime!
You can try GNU cFlow tool (http://www.gnu.org/software/cflow/).
It will give you graph, charting control flow within program.
I got a task related to ANCIENT C++ project which hasn't any documentation, comments at all and all code/variables is written in foreign language. Do I have a chance to analyze this code in a 1 working day and make a design/UML to create new features? I have been sitting around for 3 hours already and I feel so frustrated... Maybe somebody also had same problem? Any advice?
BR,
I suspect the biggest issue may be the fact that it's in a foreign language. You can use various static code analysis tools to try and understand what's going on, but if everything is presented in an unfamiliar language then that's still no use. Your first step (I believe) is to find someone who can speak this language and get them to translate as you go...
1) Use Doxygen , You can configure doxygen to extract the code structure from undocumented source files.
2) Use source Insight, Source Insight is an advanced code editor and browser with built-in analysis for C/C++, C#, and Java programs
Short answer, no - you probably don't have a chance to understand the code in one day. Reading/maintaining code is one of the hardest things to do, especially when it's lacking documentation. The fact that the code is in a foreign language (!) makes it even harder.
Sounds like you are on a very restricted (unrealistic) time-budget, but Working With Legacy Software is a good book if you're working with legacy systems. If you are planning to keep adding new features to the legacy system it's your responsibility to make your management aware of the scope of the operation. Or at least try.
Under this time constraint (1 day) it may or may not be doable depending on the size of the project - if its a few hundred lines of code then for sure. If its a serious project with several tens of thousands code lines, then likely no.
The first thing you need to know is what is this program supposed to do at all. If you have no idea what it does and how it does it, then analyzing the code will give you the answer but it will be a long and frustrating task. So my first suggestion would be to get yourself familiar with the outer workings of the software - what does it supposed to do and generally how it is supposed to do it. If you are doing it as part as your work then you should be able to get someone to walk you through using the program - even if its UI is in a foreign language (which I hope it doesn't, even if the code is written by a foreign language speaker).
Once you know what the software is attempting to do, then it should be fairly straight forward (even if lengthy and daunting) to rewrite all the comments in your own language for you to understand. I suggest doing so in a bottoms-up approach: its easier to understand the small and trivial things a program does, then to understand the top-level logic - and a lot of trivial things in order make up the logic of the software.
Only once you understand - to a large degree, anyway - the inner workings of the program you may write its functional spec and work on features.
Non-free way on Windows:
You can use CppDepend. This application is able to parse your visual project or your source files. It gives you a lot of information like dependency trees. You can try the trial (Maybe it will be enough for what you have to do).
Free way multi-platform:
You can use doxygen with a special configuration (extract code structure from undocumented code) and analyze the result.
I was quite happy with a tool called Understand (15-day eval license available) for this kind of task. However, I agree with Guss that the time you'll need depends a lot on the size of the code, and one day is probably just enough for a small program.
cscope & ctags are a must when I do my own code, and even more when looking to other's code.
You may also try this ::
http://www.sgvsarc.com/product_crystalflow.htm
I have to do enhancements to an existing C++ project with above 100k lines of code.
My question is How and where to start with such projects ?
The problem increases further if the code is not well documented.
Are there any automated tools for studying code flow with large projects?
Thanx,
Use Source Control before you touch anything!
There's a book for you: Working Effectively with Legacy Code
It's not about tools, but about various approaches, processes and techniques you can use to better understand and make changes to the code. It is even written from a mostly C++ perspective.
First study the existing interface well.
Write tests if they are absent, or expand already written ones.
Modify the source code.
Run tests to check if the modification somehow breaks the older behaviour.
There is another good book, currently freely available on the net, about object oriented reengineering : http://www.iam.unibe.ch/~scg/OORP/
The book "Code Reading" by Diomidis Spinellis contains lots of advice about how to gain an overview and in-depth knowledge about larger, unknown projects.
Chapter 6 is focuses sonely on that topic (Tacking Large Projects). Also the chapters about tooling (Ch. 9) and architecture (Ch. 8) might contain nice hints for you.
However, the book is about understanding (by reading) the "code". It does not tackle directly the maintenance step.
First thing I would do is try to find the product's requirements.
It's almost unthinkable that a product of this size would be developed without requirements.
By perusing the requirements, you'll be able to:
get a sense of what the product (and hence the code) is at least supposed to be doing
see just how well (or poorly) the code actually fulfills those requirements
Otherwise you're just looking at code, trying to divine the intention of the developers...
If you are able to run the code in a PC, you can try to build a callgraph usually from a profiling output.
Also cross referencing tools like cscope, ctags, lxr, etc. Can help a lot. A
Spending some time reading, building class diagrams or even adding comments to the parts of the code you took long to understand are steps towards getting familiar with the codebase and getting ready to modify/extend it.
The first thing you need to do is understand how the code works. Read what documentation there is and then watch the program operate under a debugger. If you watch the main function/loop and then slowly work your way deeper into the program, you can gain a pretty good idea how things are operating. Make sure you write down your findings so others who follow after you have a better position to start from.
Running Doxygen with the EXTRACT_ALL tag set to document all the relationships in the code base. It's not going to help you with the code flow, but hopefully it will shed some light with regards to the structure and design of the entire application.
A very good austrian programmer once told me that in order to understand a program you first have to understand the data-structures that the program uses.
I'm just now learning to programming at age 17. It's hard for me to talk to other programmers as I'm just out of high school (which means I can't take programming courses). I know that I write terrible code, and not like Jeff Atwood terrible code, my code actually sucks. So where can I post some of my code and get real programmers to review it. I know if I had a question I could ask it on StackOverflow, but I want to post a whole class and get a review on it.
The real problem here is that I'm not going to be writing the next great piece of Software. I'm going to be writing a really useless class, which will serve no other purpose than to teach me how to program. This code will never be used, ever! EVER! How can I get an advanced (or even intermediate) programmer to look at my code?
Thanks in advance! ;-)
Look to the open source community. There are plenty of existing and new projects that would love an eager (if inexperienced) developer to offer support.
Going this route offers two advantages:
You get to see great code in action and learn from it
Any changes you submit will be reviewed by an experienced developer and they will often give you excellent suggestions as to how to improve your code before it will be accepted
Start by choosing a project in your language (there are a bunch in c++) and check out the code. You don't need to understand it all, but you must be able to understand at least a portion of it.
If the project looks way to complicated, keep looking. Younger projects tend to have less code that you need to learn.
If you can't get great programmers to look at your code, do the next best thing: look at theirs!
Look for a bunch of code snippets that do the same (simple) thing. Before you look at them too closely, write your own code to perform the same task. Compare all of the snippets with your own (and each other!) and try to figure out the reasons for the differences.
I recommend looking for code from well established projects. Code from tutorials often ignores important details for the sake of simplicity.
Why don't you try RefactorMyCode?
I would try not to write useless code, but attempt to solve some particular problem. Your learning will be more advanced if you are learning in the context of a real-world scenario. It doesn't have to be a big business domain; could even be a game or a shareware utility.
As for getting your code reviewed, the open source community is a good way to go as The Lame Duck says - in fact you're guaranteed it gets some form of review if you actually contribute to a project. Other avenues to explore: your local C++ users' group, checking out a co-op program available through a junior college, or engaging someone in a company that sponsors interns.
I haven't tried sites such as RefactorMyCode as suggested by Gilad Naor, but that seems promising. And, yes, StackOverflow is a good place for bite-sized chunks of code. If you do that, explain what you are trying to do, and why you are trying to do it that way, and ask if there's a better approach. Good luck!
I think the best way to learn is the way I learned (I may be biased): trial and error. I just wrote programs all the time, teaching myself as I went. I'd write terrible code, and I would wrestle with making it do what I wanted. Often it would make me give up on that particular project. But on the next project, I'd take a different approach, and it would work better. Repeat ad nauseam. Once you know where the rough spots are in your designs, you'll be able to ask specific questions on places like SO, or, better yet IMHO, come up with better designs yourself. I independently invented all the major design patterns just through frustration at the solutions I'd created in the past. I think this gives me a valuable perspective, since for most people design patterns are just a "best practice", but I know the pain that comes with using other designs, and I can see signs of bad designs in code very easily (it takes one to know one). This last skill is one that I often see lacking in other programmers... they can't see why their design is deficient and they should use something else.
You could always try a site like Project Euler, where there are a whole load of problems that will test your skills and a whole bunch of solutions to those problems, submitted by others. Project Euler tends to focus on algorithms rather than higher level programming constructs, but I imagine that there are others in a similar vein.
Do something fun and don't worry too much about code style yet. I started out with BASIC on Commodore 64 without even realizing that there was such a thing as clean code vs dirty code. If I had worried a lot about that then, it might have hindered me from progressing. You always learn best when doing it playfully.
Maybe a bit late, but since StackExchange has Code Review, it worth the answer:
Code Review Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for peer
programmer code reviews. It's 100% free, no registration required.
Here is the link: Code Review Stack Exchange
I am considering the possibility of designing an application that would allow people to develop C++ code graphically. I was amazed when I discovered Scratch (see site and tutorial videos).
I believe most of C++ can be represented graphically, with the exceptions of preprocessor instructions and possibly function pointers.
What C++ features do you think could be (or not be) represented by graphical items?
What would be the pros and cons of such an application ? How much simpler would it be than "plain" C++?
RECAP and MORE:
Pros:
intuitive
simple for small applications
helps avoid typos
Cons:
may become unreadable for large (medium?) - sized applications
manual coding is faster for experienced programmers
C++ is too complicated a language for such an approach
Considering that we -at my work- already have quite a bit of existing C++ code, I am not looking for a completely new way of programming. I am considering an alternate way of programming that is fully compatible with legacy code. Some kind of "viral language" that people would use for new code and, hopefully, would eventually use to replace existing code as well (where it could be useful).
How do you feel towards this viral approach?
When it comes to manual vs graphical programming, I tend to agree with your answers. This is why, ideally, I'll find a way to let the user always choose between typing and graphical programming. A line-by-line parser (+partial interpreter) might be able to convert typed code into graphical design. It is possible. Let's all cross our fingers.
Are there caveats to providing both typing and graphical programming capabilities that I should think about and analyze carefully?
I have already worked on template classes (and more generally type-level C++) and their graphical representation.
See there for an example of graphical representation of template classes. Boxes represent classes or class templates. First top node is the class itself, the next ones (if any) are typedef instructions inside the class. Bottom nodes are template arguments. Edges, of course, connect classes to template arguments for instantiations.
I already have a prototype for working on such type-level diagrams.
If you feel this way of representing template classes is plain wrong, don't hesitate to say so and why!
Much as I like Scratch, it is still much quicker for an experienced programmer to write code using a text editor than it is to drag blocks around, This has been proved time and again with any number of graphical programming environments.
Writing code is the easiest part of a developers day. I don't think we need more help with that. Reading, understanding, maintaining, comparing, annotating, documenting, and validating is where - despite a gargantuan amount of tools and frameworks - we still are lacking.
To dissect your pros:
Intuitive and simple for small applications - replace that with "misleading". It makes it look simple, but it isn't: As long as it is simple, VB.NET is simpler. When it gets complicated, visual design would get in the way.
Help avoid typos - that's what a good style, consistency and last not least intellisense are for. The things you need anyway when things aren't simple anymore.
Wrong level
You are thinking on the wrong level: C++ statements are not reusable, robust components, they are more like a big bag of gears that need to be put together correctly. C++ with it's complexity and exceptions (to rules) isn't even particulary suited.
If you want to make things easy, you need reusable components at a much higher level. Even if you have these, plugging them together is not simple. Despite years of struggle, and many attempts in many environments, this sometimes works and often fails.
Viral - You are correct IMO about that requriement: allow incremental adoption. This is closely related to switching smoothly between source code and visual representation, which in turn probably means you must be able to generate the visual representation from modified source code.
IDE Support - here's where most language-centered approaches go astray. A modern IDE is more than just a text editor and a compiler. What about debugging your graph - with breakpoints, data inspection etc? Will profilers, leak detectors etc. highlight nodes in your graph? Will source control give me a Visual Diff of yesterday's graph vs. today's?
Maybe you are on to something, despite all my "no"s: a better way to visualize code, a way to put different filters on it so that I see just what I need to see.
The early versions of C++ were originally written so that they compiled to C, then the C was compiled as normal.
What it sounds like you are describing is a graphical language that is compiled to C++, which will then be compiled as normal.
So really you are not creating a graphical C++, you are creating a new language that happens to be graphical. Nothing wrong with that, but don't let C++ restrict what you do, because eventually you may want to compile the graphical language straight to machine code, or even to something like CIL, Java ByteCode, or whatever else tickles your fancy.
Other graphical languages you may want to check out are LabVIEW, and more generally the category of visual programming languages.
Good luck in your efforts.
The complexity of a nontrivial program is usually too high to be represented with graphical symbols, which are low in their information content. Unless your approach is markedly different in some way, I am skeptical that this would be of value based on past efforts.
So, practically speaking, his will be useful only for instructional purposes and very simple programs. But that would still be a great target market for a product like this. sometimes people have trouble grasping the fundamentals, and a visual model might be just the thing to help things click.
Interesting idea. I doubt I'd use it though. I tend to prefer coding in a flat text editor, not even an IDE, and for tough problems I prefer a pad of paper. Most of the really experienced programmers I know work this way, Maybe it's because we grew up in a different environment, but I think it's also because of the way we think about programming. As you get more experience, you start seeing the code in your head more clearly than any GUI tool will show it to you.
As for your question, I'd nominate templates as one of the harder / more interesting sort of thing to try to represent well. They are ubiquitous and carry information that you won't have access to as you are designing your tool. Getting that to the user in a useful way should pose an interesting challenge.
What C++ features do you think could be [...] represented by graphical items?
Object Oriented Design. Hence classes, inheritance, polymorphism, mutability, const-ness etc. And, templates.
What would be the pros and cons of such an application?
It may be easier for beginners to start writing programs. For the experienced, it may be get rid of the boring parts of programming.
Think of any other code generator. They create a framework for you to write the more involved portion(s). They also lead to bloated-code (think of any WYSIWYG HTML editor).
The biggest challenge, as I see it, is that any such UI necessarily hinders the user's imagination.
How much simpler would it be than "plain" c++ ?
It can be a real pain, when you wade through truckloads of errors which is typical of code generators.
Further, since a lot of code is generated, you have no idea of what is going on -- debugging becomes difficult.
Also, for the experienced there may be some irritation to find that the generated code is not per their preferred coding style.
I prefer hot-keys instead graphical menus and buttons.
And I think same thing will happen with graphical development tool. Many peoples will prefer manual codding.
But, source code visualizer - should be nice thing.
I like the idea, but I suspect there comes a point where things get far too complicated to be represented graphically.
However, given recent experience at work; it would be useful to give such a graphical interface to a non-techie person to use to create basic drag-and-drop programs, leaving myself free to get on with some "proper" programming ;-) If it can do the job of allowing somebody non-skilled to build something functional it can be a very good thing (even if programming logic escapes them)
There comes a point in such a system where it becomes easier to define what you want to do using literal C++ code, rather than have a user interface getting in the way; it can get frustrating to the sessioned programmer knowing the precise code that needs to be written but then only being limited to the design GUI. I'm specifically thinking about a more common application, such as html editors/designers in which they allow newbies to build their websites without knowing any html at all.
It would be interesting to see how such a system would handle the dynamic allocation of memory, and the different states of a program as time progressed; I suspect that there are some very basic programming concepts that may be difficult to represent graphically.. Polymorphism..? Virtual Classes, LinkList, Stacks/Circular Queues. I wonder for a moment how you would explain an image compression algorithm (such as jpg) successfully too without the help of a gigantic display screen.
I also wonder if such a system would even go to such a low level, and whether you would be dealing with abstracted concepts and the compiler would be working out the best way to do something.
I've been working on a new model-driven software development paradigm named ABSE (http://www.abse.info) that supports end-user programming: It's a template-based system that can be complemented with transformation code. I also have an IDE (named AtomWeaver) implementing ABSE that is in pre-alpha stage right now.
With AtomWeaver, as an expert/architect, you build your knowledge Templates, and then the developers (or end-users if you make your meta-models simpler) can just "assemble" systems by building blocks, and then filling template parameters in form-style editors.
At the end, pressing the "Generate" button will create the final system as specified by the architect/expert.
I'm surprised you think function pointers would be a particular problem. How about anything at all to do with pointers?
A programming language can be represented by a hierarchy of nodes - that's exactly what the compiler turns it into. It is very strange that the UI for editing programs is still a sequence of characters that get parsed, because the degrees of freedom in the editor is way larger than the available set of allowed choices. But intellisense helps to reduce this problem a lot.
C++ would be a strange choice to base such a system on.
I think the major problem of this kind of IDEs are that the code generated becomes unmantainable easily.
This happened to Delphi. It's a really nice tool to develop some kind of applications, however, when we start adding complex relationships between the components, start adding Design Patterns, etc. the code grows to an unmantainable size.
I believe it's also because graphical tools don't apply the concept of MVC (or if they do, it's only in the way that the IDE understands).
It can be really helpful for prototypes and very small applications that don't tend to grow, otherwise it can become a mess for the developer(s)