"Best" C++ IDE?

[mxyzptlk]

I'm trying to find a good and proper C++ IDE/Compiler to practice on. I have tried DevC++, but it often failed to compile perfectly good code. I've tried VC++, but it doesn't seem to have a Compiler, or if it does, I can't find it.
Right now, I'm about to try one called Eclipse.
In your opinion, what is the Best C++ IDE?
(Note: I realize that "Best" is a really objective term. I'm looking for an IDE that can compile code and compile it properly, That has at least partial code completion, and that is just easy to use.)

[Iq Unlimited]

DevC++ works fine for me.

[mar77a]

VC++ comes with the compiler and is probably one of Microsoft's best products. Dev-cpp is good to start with c++ but VC++ is simply, the best for Windows.

[urraka]

Eclipse gave me a headache. It's slow and it didn't come with a compiler. I wouldn't really recomend it for c++.

[jrgp]

I recommend Geany. It's got a clean user interface, a lot of features and a compiler.
http://geany.uvena.de/

[Despair]

VC++ comes with the compiler and is probably one of Microsoft's best products. Dev-cpp is good to start with c++ but VC++ is simply, the best for Windows.

says the guy with a 400mhz processor


but seriously VC++ is the best if you like windows

[ramirez]

What do you mean there doesn't seem to be a compiler? o_O
Anyway going with what others already said, Visual C++ is easily the most complete and best IDE I've used for C++.

[FliesLikeABrick]

What about eclipse?

[rainrider]

Borland cpp builder

[rfreak]

I recomand Code::Blocks

[rayanaga]

Visual C++ 2005.
Its awesome and its free.

[DorkeyDear]

I used to use Dev-C++ but that sucks, don't use it
Now I use "Microsoft Visual C++ Express Edition" which I find useful.

[Thomas]

All the mentioned IDEs (except VS) use MinGW/gcc as standard compiler (C::B can be easily configured to use VC++, used that one already). The main difference between VC++ and gcc that I expierenced is the optimization. VC++ optimizes the machine code much more.

[Pragma]

I'm probably going to get flamed for a few of these, but here we go:

Code::Blocks is okay, but personally, I didn't like how the project's file listing had to be manually maintained against what was in your project's directory.

The various VS.NET incarnations are good provided you have gobs of RAM at your disposal, or are targeting the CLI to begin with.  When writing and testing memory hungry programs like games or simulations, and could really give a flip about the CLI in general, it's just too "fat" for the job.

Eclipse is another resource hungry nightmare that demands a fast system with lots of memory.  However, it has really nice "refactoring" support, and is endlessly extensible.

All of the above have GUI-assisted runtime debug support, which is really the make-it-or-break-it feature for some developers.  Code-completion is another one, as the OP mentioned.  It really depends on how you prefer to work.

My personal approach is not for everyone: I just stick to a minimal tabbed text editor with highlighting support like TextPad, Crimson Editor, or even GEdit if I'm in Linux.  From there my build management is either Make, ANT or even shell scripts, as the text-editor provides all one needs for configuration.  Debugging is accomplished via the time-tested printf() statement, windbg, and gdb. 

In this mode, my editor's memory and CPU footprint is absolutely minimal, I can rebound from a test much faster than the big IDE's can, and I'm able to do my job on almost any computer since "installation" of this kit takes no time at all.

Edit: I guess this isn't much help for you mxyzptlk , but its all I can offer.  While I haven't tried it, jrgp's suggestion of Geany gets my vote since it claims to be lightweight; I might even try it out myself!

[jrgp]

All the mentioned IDEs (except VS) use MinGW/gcc as standard compiler (C::B can be easily configured to use VC++, used that one already). The main difference between VC++ and gcc that I expierenced is the optimization. VC++ optimizes the machine code much more.

Optimizes the machine code more for what platform? Of course anything made by Microsoft for developing will most likely create faster programs for windows than something else. gcc's Win32 compiler probably was just an add on, but gcc is definitely going to give amazing results for creating Linux or other unix binaries.

Pragma, Geany is all I use when I'm on Linux. I'm almost never, ever on Windows, but for that I prefer Notepad++ over anything else.

Here's a cool pic of Geany: http://www.jrgp.us/screenshots/editors/Geany_Linux.png

[mar77a]

I recently moved from devcpp to code:blocks (thank you Toumaz). I suggest everyone doing so, switching is very easy.

[jrgp]

Whoa, Code::Blocks is awesome! Thanks, mar77a & Toumaz for the suggestion.

Screenshot on Linux: http://www.jrgp.us/screenshots/editors/codeblocks.png

[ramirez]

The various VS.NET incarnations are good provided you have gobs of RAM at your disposal, or are targeting the CLI to begin with.  When writing and testing memory hungry programs like games or simulations, and could really give a flip about the CLI in general, it's just too "fat" for the job.

VS.NET isn't limited to CLI/managed code, you can also compile unmanaged code.

[Pragma]

The various VS.NET incarnations are good provided you have gobs of RAM at your disposal, or are targeting the CLI to begin with.  When writing and testing memory hungry programs like games or simulations, and could really give a flip about the CLI in general, it's just too "fat" for the job.

VS.NET isn't limited to CLI/managed code, you can also compile unmanaged code.

Yes, you're absolutely right - I never meant to give the impression that it couldn't.  But it has a rather heavy bent towards all things MS, especially managed code (for obvious reasons).  It's just plain awesome for that stuff, but the overhead of having at least one CLI managed environment (you can run the child task in a separate CLI VM, right?) can be a bit much for some projects.

[MrTacoBill]

Code::Blocks is the best