i was discussing with a friend of mine about Visual Studio when suddenly another student comes in and says : "I'm using DevC++.. they even made a version for Windows8" having said that he kinda is not really an expert ( not saying that i am ) i answered <> that DevC++ is a really outdated IDE that misses most of the features of modern IDEs such as Visual Studio ( and CB too).
Well i later learned that DevC++ has been updated and is now using an updated version of the Mingw's port of GCC that supports C++11. So.. i couldn't really find any good info on the web about the current status and reliability of DevC++ tha't why i'm asking here.
What's the current status as of 2013 of DevC++ compared to other ( free ) IDEs such as Visual studio or Code::Blocks ? How about the debugger, library linking ( heard that was pretty bad ), intellisense and more ?
A great deal here depends on what you want.
I would characterize Dev-C++ as a mediocre IDE with really good packaging.
What I mean by good packaging is that Dev-C++ is quite easy to get installed and working. The package includes a recent copy of gcc, and (at least in my experience) getting it installed and working is quite simple and straightforward. Up until a few years ago, the easiest way to get gcc installed and actually working (especially under Windows) was almost certainly to install Dev-C++. Even if you only planned to use the compiler from the command line, it was worth installing the IDE just to get the compiler installed correctly without jumping through dozens of flaming hoops. Other packages have caught up in that respect though, so there are half a dozen (or so) that make it trivial to get gcc installed and working just fine (and many of them have more up-to-date compilers than Dev-C++ too).
What I mean by mediocre IDE is that the editor (especially) simply isn't very capable compared to most others. Consider a few points:
To me, these limitations might have been acceptable, say, 20 years ago, especially when more capable editors were likely to cost more money. Today, these strike me as simply inexcusable omissions. Given the number of free alternatives that are obviously superior, I can't imagine using this on a regular basis.
I have a hard time figuring out a person or situation to which I'd consider Dev-C++ well suited. If you're programming on a regular basis, you deserve a more capable editor, and integration with the source code control you're using (which I certainly hope isn't CVS).
It's kind of a stretch, but I suppose it might work for a middle manager who wants to be able to glance through code and check that it compiles cleanly, but doesn't use it enough to bother learning any more than the most rudimentary use of an editor. Even there, however, failing to support modern version control systems is a severe limitation. I wouldn't be surprised if there are plug-ins to support more modern version control, but if you have to spend much time on configuration, you lose the one real advantage of Dev-C++.
Bottom line: While it might not be the worst possible choice, I also can't imagine a situation in which Dev-C++ would be my first choice, or even among my top three choices.