Category: Geeks r Us
Hi friends,
Code-blocks is an application for windows to execute C and C++ codes. Its an open-source software. Many use VBA, but it must be bought. Code-blocks is fully compatible with Jaws and NVDA. It can help blind programmers in the world of creation.
For more information go to:
http://www.cprogramming.com/
This is very confusing.
What do you mean that VBA has to be bought_
You can run VBScript and JavaScript in a web browser, you can use Windows Scripting Host to run Windows scripts, it is free.
There are numerous code compiles for c and cpp code, Visual Studio Express one of them, with a very well defunctional IDE (save with some specific issues in some versions). Eclipse s ood, rns Java and can be configured to work with Python and lots of other compilers.
Writeing C code and scripting are two very different things.
You can use VBA with any office applications for free, if you buy the office suite, if you do not, the usefulness of VBA scripting is much reduced. Writing the same functionality with C is complex and pointless if you do not have the host app and libraries you need to do their magic.
So what exactly does this do that other compilers cannot_
Nothing wrong with more selection for programmers, and great that it is accessible, but the advantages you claim for it make absolutely no sense.
Tend to agree with Wildebrew here.
Touting an application or environmental on accessibility alone won't get you anywhere. If I created an IDE with a similar back-end and told sighted people to get it because it had pink flowers / looked really nice, that would be met with similar results. Except maybe among the Apple fanchildren who, like pet birds, get all glazed-over and entranced when they see something shiny.
Now here's what I'd like to see, but it'd be one monster environment: a cross-platform compiler where when you draw dialogs, create controls, etc., as you compile for your environment, the ass end utilizes the common framework for that platform, say the Cocoa interfaces for Apple, .Net for Windows, Gnome or whatever's the latest Ubuntu / whatever desktop for Linux.
Yeah yeah, I know, dream on ... but that would be a development environment to create some wow factor.
Ísn't that kind of what Java is trying to do with the SWT?
I am not clear on the details, as I have never used it, but I thought it tried to use the native O.S. controls, perhaps that only applies to Windows.
For one thing I wish they implemented the same accessibility interfaces in all environments, or at lesat tried to make them similar, now there would be something.
You know, I don't know about that particular Java implementation.
I was really gung ho on Java back in 97, when I was fool enough to believe the hype, to some extent anyway, that Java was going to be totally platform-agnostic and the develop-anywhere-platform of the future. Problem is, like you say, which Java.
I'm guessing, and naturally it's just a guess as I haven't looked at this new IDE, but if it does transcoding for Mac and Linux, they have similar kernels - as usual, Windows gets in the way. Of course, Mac pre-OSX was all proprietary also. But I wonder what would happen to the universe as we know it if Microsoft quit with the anti-Unix thinking and leveraged a unix kernel on the back end, while leaving a Windows 7-like front end. I realize that without a lot of middleware, that would render useless many Windows appliations now.
They won't be able to do what Apple did when going to OSX, basically tell users their old apps (with a few exceptions) written in Carbon just weren't going to work. Apple was a boutique, still acts like one, and Windows supports billions of users / millions of enterprises. But still, would the Windows-on-Unix approach have the partial walled garden effect of Android?
I don't know if the real solution is platform-agnosticism or universal acceptance of a solitary base platform. For a majority of computer users, Bill Gates' speech in 1996 about people liking to tinker with their computers is no longer true. Personally, I know people I'm glad to see moved on to using mobile-device-only solutions in the home. They only had a computer to get online, and all the maintenance was annoying for them, and a headache for the rest of us.
I think the PC tweaker is going the way of the shade tree mechanic.
As much fun as it might be, for example, to jailbreak my Apple device and write a couple apps just to fool around, I need to use the thing and often. A car on blocks and with its engine jacked up is of little practical use, no matter how romanticized my father's generation may have felt about it.
Strayed a bit from the original topic yes, but I'm watching with interest to see where we go with this stuff. To be platform-agnostic will definitely mean an agreed-upon set of standards for interfaces, not only for accessibility but many other things as well. If we succeed, I've no doubt it will be immensely profitable as open / standard systems always generate more dollars per work hour in profit than do proprietary, closed, legally-clamped ones. Turf wars cost the industry and the consumer a ton of money with no real actualized results, and they aren't real competition at all. They're pissing contests and little else.