Select up to 5 answers.
Full C++ 11(and beyond) support and reduced compilation speed are what I want to see the most.
Refactoring as listed is not useful because Visual Assist X already does all of that and more.
Conformance IV (for Visual Studio): Two phase instantiation and a conformant pre-processor. I cannot even begin to count the hours I spend fixing missing/wrong typename and template keywords that Visual Studio users keep adding.
Faster compile and link times.
But, above all, a more comprehensible error messages. Don't like Concepts too much, But if that is the way, go for it!
Runtime Reflection (RTTI++) and Modules would be nice too
I think that most important thing is full conformance...
It's all very well saying "40% of remaining C++11 features", but it really matters which features you're talking about. Some will want the library changes, some will want user defined literals, others will want variadic templates. If you pick the "wrong" 40%, some users would rather you'd spent the effort on refactoring, whilst those same users would be happy without refactoring if they could have a particular C++11 feature.
Not surprisingly 'Conformance' is the most wanted in the list.
I want duality, or trinity option... when I edit class in cpp that it is modified at the same time in header and for trinity option also that the file name is changed when I change class name.
I guess from the results that Sutter-followers are more likely to be conformance wonks. 'Everyone knows' that most devs code in C++ for performance.
I would expect my compiler/IDE vendor to concentrate solely on conformance , to the exclusion of everything else until 99% is achieved.
Faster compile and link times would be great. Building a large application shouldn't be an excuse for a coffee break.
The "other" field seem limited to a few words :-(
Currently I use VS2010, my top top top concern is instability of the IDE up to complete unusability. Can I care about 'refactoring' or other whistles if it just crashes every hour or goes unresponsible for minutes not even bothering to use one of the 8 cores? And the long-requested PAUSE for intellisense, to at least keep it on hold until I'm done editing a header file.
My other main problem is still pretty lacking code navigation -- finding declaration fitting the definition of a function (resolving possible macros, top-level const differences, scope...). Providing the call graph that is precise, not misses taking function address, and appearing in timely manner.
More sensible build engine -- that does not pick up some .BIN file used by the nvidia display driver as a dependency :-(.
More and better static analysis (aka warnings actually issued (i.e. is it annoying to know that an unused 'static' function is discovered -- unless using C compile -- but the same variant in unnamed namespace is not?) And for the presented warnings at least the minimal context info. Say an error flagged in a .h file is pretty much impossible to tell which .cpp used it in the first place and how we got there.
From the features on the list my top wants are certainly the C++ features, preferably all and now -- certainly can compromise using some priority ordering.
Sorry for being sloppy, I meant "compiler" as in the whole compiler product, and besides that refactoring does need some compiler support including a real compiler front-end in the IDE (the IDE needs more than a tag parser, it really needs to fully and correctly parse the code and build ASTs and such).
I agree. Conformance, conformance, conformance!
I, too, would like to call bullshit on refactoring as solely a compiler feature. Although, in order to facilitate refactoring, an IDE might need to perform some parsing of the kind that a compiler does, and might well delegate said parsing to a compiler.
I guess the only 5 things (in this list) I would expect from my C++ compiler are the Conformance and the Performace ones ... I can't see myself refactoring any code using g++, I'll stick to Emacs for that :)
What does "refactoring" have to do with the *compiler*? That's an IDE issue.
With a nod to your top boss Steve Balmer: "Conformance, Conformance, CONFORMANCE!" The lack of full conformance of the VC compiler is a real detriment to portability.