IDE Version 2.0.0 - why remove MX ?

[jcslb]

Why, oh why have you separated IDE and MX such that .ioc files can no longer be opened in IDE?

I cannot imagine any benefits and it makes the IDE significantly worse, such that I've felt compelled to revert to version 1.19.0 ( go to Help -> About STM32CubeIDE -> Installation Details -> Installation History -> select version -> Revert)

I couldn't find any other means of feeding back my strong dislike of this change other than a post like this. I hope version 2.1.0 comes out soon and re-integrates MX and IDE!

[RobK1]

STM32CubeIDE 2.0 release - early heads-up! - STMicroelectronics Community

[Andrew Neil]

---

@jcslb wrote:

I cannot imagine any benefits !

---

See the explanation already linked by @RobK1 

---

@jcslb wrote:

it makes the IDE significantly worse

---

Does it?

I guess it could be a minor inconvenience at the start of a project, or when the hardware config needs to be changed, but I think that is a tiny part of the work of the IDE ?

And this is the way Keil & IAR (and other) IDE users have always had to do it.

Just my 2p.

[mƎALLEm]

Hello,

There are two main reasons: flexibility and performance:

[mfgkw]

These are all reasons against any IDE.

I am in fact not a fan of an IDE. Nearly all work suits better for me with standalone tools like EMACS, the toolchain and gdb.

The only exception where I was persuaded to an IDE was STM32Cube. And this was exactly because of the integration with CubeMX. (Even here I used EMACS to edit longer passages of source code, but at least I used an IDE.)

When CubeMX is not integrated anymore I see no real reason to use the enbeloved Eclipse. And return to flexibility and performance...