SlickEdit Community

SlickEdit Product Discussion => SlickEdit® => Topic started by: Dennis on March 05, 2019, 11:12:07 pm

Title: Anyone still require 32-bit SlickEdit ?
Post by: Dennis on March 05, 2019, 11:12:07 pm
Two issues we know would have to be addressed if we go 64-bit only:

The advantages to dropping 32-bit SlickEdit would be:
Title: Re: Anyone still require 32-bit SlickEdit ?
Post by: ebbe on March 06, 2019, 08:13:49 am
I have had issues with using GDB on 32-bit programs where the solution was to switch to the 32-bit version of Slickedit.
Title: Re: Anyone still require 32-bit SlickEdit ?
Post by: JimmieC on March 06, 2019, 03:17:03 pm
I still use SlickEdit 32-bit because I have to maintain some old embedded products where the tools require 32-bit. The 32-bit requirement isn't for the software so much as the JTAG debuggers they use (drivers). That said, the current SE 32-bit probably does all I need it to do for that legacy support.

Currently, I also have a tool chain that we run in an XP VM. I am still running SE v16.0.3.0 32-bit for that. I would like to run the last version of SE for XP in that, but I don't know what version that is. And, I did not have maintenance in those days to get it.

That said, SE 32-bit today probably does all I need for legacy work. However, the embedded systems I work with don't use things like GDB, etc. that others might need. I just use SE as a strong editor, not a debug and scripting environment.

If SE does go 64-bit only, you could keep the last XP compatible version and the last 32-bit, non-XP, version available for customers that need it for legacy support. That is, (in the 64-bit only future) if you purchase SE, these two 32-bit versions are available to the customer as well. Of course, the legacy version will not have new improvements which is how I deal with XP now.

Regards,
Jim
Title: Re: Anyone still require 32-bit SlickEdit ?
Post by: jporkkahtc on March 06, 2019, 08:52:11 pm
WRT GDB: Even if the standard windows builds don't to multi-arch, you can build it yourself and select specific architectures, or just select all, and it works fine on Windows.
Title: Re: Anyone still require 32-bit SlickEdit ?
Post by: brianan on March 07, 2019, 11:11:50 pm
I use it occasionally on legacy Windows systems.  Only as the familiar text editor I know, not as a development platform.  I would be happy with a deprecated version for x86.
Title: Re: Anyone still require 32-bit SlickEdit ?
Post by: bengle on March 14, 2019, 03:40:56 pm
I would be okay with just having a 64-bit version, but having some sort of SCC adaptor process would make it much easier to use.
Title: Re: Anyone still require 32-bit SlickEdit ?
Post by: Dan on April 03, 2019, 03:05:53 am
I would be okay with just having a 64-bit version, but having some sort of SCC adaptor process would make it much easier to use.

What version control system are you using?
Title: Re: Anyone still require 32-bit SlickEdit ?
Post by: bengle on April 03, 2019, 12:40:44 pm
I am using Dimensions from Micro Focus (formerly Serena Software).
Title: Re: Anyone still require 32-bit SlickEdit ?
Post by: Munnukka on May 26, 2019, 10:04:33 am
I go with JimmieC's answer. Some older, but still in use, tools work only in 32-bit environment. Those are mostly in IoT domain and compilation environment needs a bit tinkering to get it in use. It would be a shame to lose SlickEdit to bring some convenience to whole process.
Title: Re: Anyone still require 32-bit SlickEdit ?
Post by: barqy on June 13, 2019, 12:19:41 am
I also use a 32 bit SCC client, though if the 32 bit slick disappeared, I'd just use the standalone agent.  Negligible impact.
Title: Re: Anyone still require 32-bit SlickEdit ?
Post by: mkempisty on July 16, 2019, 04:12:59 pm
We still have some 32-bit OS installations that we use.  So keeping the 32-bit option is a plus for us.
Title: Re: Anyone still require 32-bit SlickEdit ?
Post by: cosborn on July 22, 2019, 07:17:15 pm
We still maintain two 32-bit system for older embedded projects, all the tools are 32-bit, including SlickEdit, maintenance on that machine has expired. No intention to update that system.