Codewarrior for OSX vs Project Builder

TopCat
Unregistered
 
Post: #1
Hello,

I was wondering if anyone here could tell me if there are any real pros for codewarrior for osx as I was thinking of going for their $99 package to help me with c/c++.
I'm not sure whether there are any real benefits this codewarrior package has over the osx's own project builder.
Thoughts?

Oh, I'm pretty well much a newbie c/c++ developer who knows the basics but I havent really gone into the gui part that much as yet!

- TopCat
Quote this message in a reply
zzajin
Unregistered
 
Post: #2
I've heard "rumors" that codewarrior's compiler/linker finishes faster than gcc and the final binary can execute faster. I would love to hear if this is the case, since I've been thinking the cheapest upgrade for me would to get codewarrior since it could decrease compile times.
Quote this message in a reply
DoG
Moderator
Posts: 869
Joined: 2003.01
Post: #3
I have used codewarrior before OS X came out, and haven't used it since, I have not bothered to upgrade CW for X. But, I can say I liked the IDE very much, it is much more polished and mac-like than PB. Project builder's IDE has quite a few quirks which sometimes really drive me nuts (like how the auto-indenting works at times).

If it's not a big investement for you, I suggest you get it, especially because it is also easier to make cross platfrom stuff in PB, you can even compile windows stuff easily (last time i checked).

- D.G
Quote this message in a reply
Feanor
Unregistered
 
Post: #4
For a newbie, you will probably be fine with PB. Many pros find that it is still not as fully featured as CodeWarrior, or that is the message I get from the endless complaints on the Project Builder mailing list. I am more than happy with PB, it being free and generally very well put together. Because the concepts involved in producing a development project are generally similar, you are not losing anything by starting with PB. THings in CW will be organized differently, but one can usually switch environments with a minimum of fuss if one understands the spirit of the system rather than getting hung up on the details.
Quote this message in a reply
TopCat
Unregistered
 
Post: #5
Thanks for the replies!!

I was just mainly wondering because of the deal that metroworks has with their codewarrior for osx at this moment. Seems that codewarrior has more features, but also harder to get the grasp of than PB?

I'll probably end up trying both anyway...see which one I feel most comfortable with and stick with that one!

- TopCat
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 81
Joined: 2002.12
Post: #6
Well, if you bought OS X or bought a OS X computer, you probably already have OS X Developer Tools Disc and that has PB. If you have money to spare, it wouldn't hurt to buy CodeWarrior, if you like what you hear. I'm just disappointed that the PB's Java Compiler isn't up to par with PC compilers.
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 365
Joined: 2002.04
Post: #7
I've always found CodeWarrior to be a lot faster than Project Builder when compiling and linking the same code. CodeWarrior's GUI is quicker as well, and it has much better syntax highlighting. The main downside is that CodeWarrior's packaging features and integration with Interface Builder aren't as nice as Project Builder's.

Neil Carter
Nether - Mac games and comic art
Quote this message in a reply
henryj
Unregistered
 
Post: #8
Metrowerks has a better compiler than gcc. It compiles faster and produces better code. Plus ther tools are better, debugger etc.

The down side is as soon as you get CW they will release an update which will cost you a couple of hundred dollars and most likely be incompatible with your current version.

I used to use CW but ditched it because of their update policy.
Quote this message in a reply
WaaMatt
Unregistered
 
Post: #9
I found that CW compiles smaller executables than gcc in the Terminal. Does that matter to you?
Quote this message in a reply
TopCat
Unregistered
 
Post: #10
Quote:I found that CW compiles smaller executables than gcc in the Terminal. Does that matter to you?


Well at this stage the size of the executables doesnt really matter to me, but more with efficiency in developing C/C++ applications and ease of use with the IDE.
In some ways its a pity that...and forgive me for saying this....there is no equivalent to Visual C++ for mac.

- TopCat
Quote this message in a reply
henryj
Unregistered
 
Post: #11
Quote:.there is no equivalent to Visual C++ for mac.

You must be joking. Visual C++ is the worst. The editor has some nice features but that's about it. VCC is the reason c++ has such a bad name.

The debugger used to be the best but the CW debugger demo at WWDC was really impressive.

CW is better than VCC.
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  CodeWarrior Question Stalin55 1 1,969 Jun 23, 2006 01:26 AM
Last Post: sealfin
  Building SpriteWorld "Simple" example with Project Builder lintmachine 1 2,528 Sep 25, 2003 06:45 PM
Last Post: Patrick