Posts: 239
Threads: 13
Joined: Apr 2020
Reputation:
15
20-12-2021, 11:17 AM
(This post was last modified: 20-12-2021, 11:32 AM by embitz.)
That's correct.
Version 2.x is focusing on ARM because that's the more or less defacto standard these days.
By focusing on only one brand a lot of overhead can be removed in the future because we don't have to take care of e.g. 16 or 32 bits or foreign GDB servers etc.
If you only need a editor/building tool then perhaps code::blocks will do the job.
In code::blocks compilers can be added dynamically.
Posts: 239
Threads: 13
Joined: Apr 2020
Reputation:
15
20-12-2021, 12:02 PM
(This post was last modified: 20-12-2021, 12:03 PM by embitz.)
Well, we have to move on and in the past the goal of Emblocks was to deliver a one-tool-fits-all, a native written Eclipse so to speak.
But now a days it's not worth the effort to keep support for all those non-ARM brands for just a few users. There is also not a real benefit for them to move to 2.x because 2.x is mainly about making ARM development more smoothly.
But why isn't code::blocks an alternative for you if you only use the compiler module?
Posts: 3
Threads: 1
Joined: May 2020
Reputation:
0
I have a good understanding of Embitz development policies
I have many projects that have worked with this editor and are being developed and edited
On the other hand, this editor has a much lighter and better environment than code :: blocks
Most of my projects are limited to this editor and I do not want to install multiple compilers and heavy editors
If it is not possible to use higher versions of this editor, I prefer to work with the same version 1.11 and not with code :: blocks
Isn't it better to add a new compiler in this edition ???