I am fairly new to programming and for my cs class i need to run individual programs. they don’t need to interact with anything else, so i am trying to just run the file I’m currently on but Kate just greys out the option. I really want to avoid using projects if i can because they’re just extra effort for no reason when I only need to run a single file. I did try using one, but Kate doesn’t have a new project button for some reason and i had some trouble with Cmake.
I’m aware that these are actually pretty basic things, but I can’t find anything online that actually explains how to use Kate at all. I would try using something else, but every IDE seems to have this same issue where by default it can’t run code and it has no documentation of any kind regarding actually running code, so i’ll just stick with the one that came with my distro.
also as a bonus question, why does every IDE seem to require you to configure every single option before it can run code and why do they all seem to discourage doing anything less than making an entire app?
What language are you programming in?
As far as I’m aware, in many cases, Kate just gives you access to the terminal where you can type commands to compile / run your code.
C
So, I’m a bit rusty, but I believe in Kate you would hit F4 to get a terminal window and you would execute
gcc your_file.c -o your_output_file
Then after that’s run you’d type just “your_output_file” and hit enter
I think on windows you’d need to make sure the output file name ends with .exe but I’m not sure about that, maybe someone else can chime in?
that does work, it’s a little clunkier than i’d like but it’s better than the code not running
Mate, I’ve built a career on that
That’s kind of the bare bones of how it works, underneath all the abstraction layers and pretty GUIs.
Then it evolves.
First, you start splitting your code into multiple source files, either because your programs get too big to keep scrolling up and down one huge file to cross-check things, or because you want to incorporate someone else’s code into your program, and it’s more than just one or two functions you can easily copy and paste. You can still keep compiling and linking all of this in one step, but the command gets so long that you make a shell script/batch file as a shortcut.
After that, you might want to mix-and-match various source files to target different platforms, or to make other bulk changes, and you start going down the rabbit hole of having your shell script take arguments, rather than having a dozen different scripts. And then one day you take another look at “make” and realize that whereas before it seemed like impenetrable overengineering, it now makes complete and obvious sense to you.
Then you discover using “make” (or a similar utility) to split compilation and linking into separate steps, which used to seem nonsensical, but now you’re dealing with codebases that take more than a couple of seconds to compile, or precompiled libraries or DLLs, and you get comfortable with the idea of just hanging on to compiled object files and (re)using them when the source for that part of the program hasn’t changed.
And finally (maybe) you look at some of the crazy stuff in fancy IDEs and understand why it’s there; that it’s just representations of all this other stuff that you now know about and feel competent with. I say “maybe” because I’ve been programming for over 35 years, occasionally professionally but mostly as a hobbyist, and there are still things in IDEs that I either don’t understand, or don’t see the point of having them. But knowing the underlying principles makes me feel comfortable enough to ignore them.
Great!
But now try to set a breakpoint and do some debugging and you’ll realise why most devs use real IDEs instead.
Dishonest and misleading. gdb ./main.elf, break 45. Learn your tools. Optimize for learning. Select tools that generalize. Avoid lock-in.