Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-4041-

How many of you use an .....

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 18:13

.....IDE?

No seriously I want to know. Don't act all like haxxorz from the '70s.

You are anonymous after all.

I myself am a newbie who was introduced to /prog/ramming using Borland's Turbo Pascal. Then I began using gedit when I began learning OOp in Java. And recently I began learning Vi but I'm still quite clumsy with it. All I am wondering is if it's really a good idea or just a waste of time?

So how many of /prog/ prefer a GUI editor over a CLI editor or even an IDE over an text editor?

Pascal was infinity more fun than JAVA lol

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 18:19

Some times I feel like using a ide is like killing a bird with a canon, but is nice to hava a IDE over a text editor

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 18:30

>>2

killing a bird with a canon

implying that wouldn't be an awesome achievement

But seriously. There is nothing more cosy than using CLI. It's a struggle to climb the learning curve but once on top it's awesome. I suggest you even get a Keyboard Only Window Tile Manager going on your system (the likes of ratpoison and dmv).

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 18:30

i use vs2008 for work, but nano and a terminal for personal stuff

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 18:36

I use Emacs with a lot of extensions (is there any other way to use it :)

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 18:46

>>1

It depends mostly just on personal opinion. I mean unless your tasks are so easy that you spend less time forming the algorithm than actually coding it. It that case CLI would be infinity faster.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 18:51

Vim is comfortable. I don't see why I should use an IDE with graphics and buttons and shit when I'm writing what is essentially just plain text.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 19:02

I like syntax highlighting, code folding, and a way to recompile and run without moving anything around on the screen.  Nano, some terminal windows, and keyboard shortcuts _are_ my IDE.

That said, if I have to code under windows, I'll take full advantage of IDE's built-in code completion and debuggers.  I HATE as-you-type syntax fixers.  I'll write down my fucking closing brace/semicolon/whatever when I damn well please!

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 19:09

>>7
I don't see why I should use an word processor with graphics and buttons and shit when I'm writing what is essentially just plain text.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 19:12

I've never been comfortable working with editors that finish your quotes or brackets for you. I know that in order to familiarize yourself with a tool's benefits, you have to embrace a new way of working, but they always seem to fuck up whatever it is I'm in the middle of typing.

I'm really used to code hints, but I'm getting so fed up with IDEs fucking shit up for me that I'm ready to switch to vim or emacs.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 19:13

>>9
You're using the wrong thing if all you're writing is plain text.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 19:38

Emacs is a pretty nice IDE; its even got a good built-in text editor, M-x viper-mode.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 19:42

If I have an IDE, I use it. Microcontroller C compilers usually have an IDE and I use it. I've used Eclipse for Java and Python, though I don't normally program in those languages. I don't know if DrRacket counts but I use that. Otherwise I just use vim/gvim and make. I don't really see a huge advantage to IDEs.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 20:10

>>9

:|

Must be a pain to read your documents unless you are talking about using LaTeX instead of a word processor.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 20:22

I like code completion and all that, but I would rather compile from the CLI or write my own makefiles than have to mess with all the settings in an IDE.

Speaking of, is there a good text editor for Windows or Linux with auto completion, code folding, etc. and preferably vim keybindings?

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 20:23

I use python's idle a lot when messing around..

I don't really see any problem with IDE's. They are just there to test out little programs.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 20:27

>>16
swing and a miss

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 20:54

Is DrScheme an IDE? I use it sometimes. Other than that, it's all emacs and nano.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 21:12

>>18
U MENA DrRacket

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 21:14

>>3
U MENA xmonad?

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 21:46

screen+vim is doing fine for me.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 21:48

>>14
Word processors are garbage. After decades of using Word and OpenOffice I am really sick of them. They're a pain in the ass to use unless you set up all these fucking styles, which would be fine in itself, except no one knows how to use styles, so any collaborative document is a massive piece of shit. You delete a word and the formatting goes nuts. That's retarded.

In another reality, latex and some version control system was used for collaboration. I go there sometimes, in my dreams. It's nice.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 21:53

They're a pain in the ass to use unless you set up all these fucking styles, which would be fine in itself, except no one knows how to use styles
To be fair, Microsoft realized this with Office 2007 and made styles the most prominent feature in the entire UI, among other things. I find that styles in Word are now extremely easy to use and almost everyone I know utilizes them.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 22:13

>>23
I've messed around with 2007 a little, the ribbon is an improvement (long-awaited), but my company can't afford to ask "how high" every time MS says "jump."

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 22:52

Emacs tends to be enough here.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-11 23:03

>>1
IDEs are more useful for reading code than they are for writing it; syntax highlighting and the ability to jump to a function definition simply by clicking on it make a world of difference.  I use netbeans at home, eclipse at work (no choice there).

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 0:54

A competent developers turns his operating system into his IDE. I've yet to hear of a single thing an IDE can do that 1. vim can't, and 2. justifies the colossal waste of resources.
Anyone defending IDEs doesn't have a clue what he's doing as a programmer.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 1:46

I love Netbeans and all the typing it does for me.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 2:05

I'm too manly to use an IDE. I use Textmate. Watch the screencasts.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 3:11

>>27
vim is an IDE.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 4:45

Not as a primary way of programming, no, I don't use IDEs. If I could get intellisense in vim, then I wouldn't see a point of IDEs at all.

Nowadays I write a lot of C# and people think that documenting their libraries isn't necessary, because they have their IDEs with code completion and inline XML documentation, god damit. I don't want to read documentation in an IDE, that's retarder. So, yeah, I have to sometimes use IDE, because that's easier than reading the source.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 6:29

Depends on what I'm doing.

For First Draft and stuff like that, Notepad++

Once I start compiling, I'll typically throw it over into and IDE. I used ECLIPSE on my last to projects (Code Red's Red Suite for writing control software for Cortex M3, Xilinx's SDK for writing control software into Spartan3A µblaze)

If I need to write more, I will often C/P over into NP++ again, because I like it. Some of the guys I work with think that's a funny habit, but I like having my code on the entire screen, in a program where an accidental key combination won't compile useless shit or some other random event that'll happen when you *want* to hit ctrl-s but instead hit ctrl-(a,w,e,d,x,z).

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 6:33

XCode

Autocompletion
Documentation lookup
Autoindentation

A stand alone text editor might be able to do these things for Objective-C, but XCode is adequate.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 6:43

>>33
Autocompletion
Case-insensitive autocompletion without the option to fix it. You are a terrible programmer if that doesn't bother you.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 6:45

It depends what I am writing. I don't use an IDE for writing in C, but I really cannot think of programming in Common Lisp without SLIME.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 7:06

>>31
If I could get intellisense in vim
You mean like with any of the dozen plugins that exist already?

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 7:08

>>31
If I could get intellisense in my IDE, then I wouldn't see a point of IDEs at all.
that really doesn't make any sense at all.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 7:18

CLI all the way here.
Tried getting into Code::Blocks but failed miserably.
Vim > IDEs.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 7:43

Vim has :make. Thread over.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 7:56

>>34
I don't use methods with the same name but different capitalization.  I guess there could be a library that does that, but so far it hasn't been an issue.

I generally don't auto-complete variable names, it's usually faster for me just to type them.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 8:04

>>40
Agreed. Although longer method/constant names do need autocompletion, especially in code that's saturated with them.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 8:13

I like IDEs for OO programming. They give you a quick outline of your classes and methods, and code completion is awesome.

e.g. you type "someObject." and eclipse presents you with a list of all methods of the object, with a description and return types for each of them.

much better than having to look up the javadocs every few seconds in my opinion. sure, if you are only dealing with the basic classes like String, you won't need this because you just know all the methods. however, when dealing with new stuff its an incredible time saver.

for small C stuff I use vim, for larger projects geany can be quite nice.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 8:30

>>42
If Java were less verbose and javadoc weren't so broken you could do what real programmers do and have the documentation open in a second window in a tiling window manager.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 8:33

>>43
just typing a dot or pressing ctrl+space is still faster than opening the relevant doc in a second window and looking for the specific method.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 9:34

>>44
I'm having a hard time picturing you coding. Are you just sitting there, eight hours a day, banging out line after line of random library functions?

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 9:59

>>1
I'm actually a hacker from the 60's. I shared the software with my community and we were free!!

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 10:34

>>46
I shared paper reels of software that made lights blink with the guy across the hall and it was pointless enough that nobody cared

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 10:44

>>47
Hey, it was fun and it was great money. What we did was a real mystery to everyone. It really was an age of computer magic.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 10:51

>>48
I'm rereading Hackers, and I agree.

The point isn't what the computer does.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 10:51

I've swithced to vim + pylint + ipython after long search for good python IDE.

I've used kdevelop for C++ back in kde3 days, but I guess I would stay with vim nowadays.

Generally IDE is good when your codebase gets so bulky and scattered that you can't find your own way around anymore. Maybe that's why Microsoft is so into it.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 14:20

When I use an editor, I don't want eight EXTRA KILOBYTES of worthless
help screens and cursor positioning code!  I just want an EDitor!!
Not a "viitor".  Not a "emacsitor".  Those aren't even WORDS!!!!
ED! ED! ED IS THE STANDARD!!!

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 14:30

>>1
…an inappropriate number of points in ellipsis? Sure, when I'm a little boozed I like to go wild and put four or even five (!) points there. But not too often, and never when I'm sober, because it makes me look like a faggot.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 14:37

>>36
dozen plugins that exist
Exactly. There's intellisense and omnicompletion and a bunch of plugins and whatnot, one combination works for one language or one platform other combination doesn't.

I couldn't get it working fast enough, so whatever, it's not that important. Though, if anyone knows how to get something like intellissense for C# in gVim on Linux and Windows, I would like to hear.

Meanwhile this is all I need:
inoremap <C-Space> <C-n>
inoremap <C-S-Space> <C-p>

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 14:53

>>53
Really? You're unwilling to stretch that tiny bit further?

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 15:36

GVim4life. It has everything you could possibly need:

vim project for easily organizing files
ctags/taglist for inline docs and jumping to code
omnicomplete for code completion
:make for building, jumping to errors
clewn for graphical interactive debugging
countless plugins for useful things, like surround, align, nerdtree
and all the vim goodness you expect out of a rockstar text editor

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 15:51

>>15
This is the part that makes me the most nervous about using an IDE. Those pages upon pages of settings, all hidden away... You can hardly tell what the hell options it's using to build a given file. Someone could set a special compiler flag for one file somewhere, and you would never know it until it causes a bug, and then you're tearing your hair out for days.

I like makefiles because they are auditable. They constitute the complete set of explicit instructions for building the project; there are no hidden flags or mysterious options fucking with your build. They are properly revisioned. You can get a log of changes to it, and look at diffs between versions to see what's changed. Good luck doing that with an IDE project; the damn thing changes every time someone adds a file.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 16:03

>>56
Just leave the Compile key alone and run make from a separate window.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 21:04

I must say I've fallen in love with Textmate recently, on OSX. It tickles my fancy

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 21:46

Vim is more than enough for large projects, for me at least.
It's even a little too much at times, and leaves me wishing for something simpler.
But it's the best solution for me, so I still use Vim.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-12 23:37

>>58
You watched the screencasts didn't you? Goddamnit.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 6:10

Beware the IDEs of march

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 7:24

SATA all the way here.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 7:45

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 8:28

CTAGS is a pathetic excuse for intelligent auto-complete

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 9:15

>>64
I use languages capable of abstractions which don't need me to do rote work computers were made for.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 16:36

>>65
how do you abstract all those parentheses away?

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 18:34

>>66
I program in flow charts using symbols, so if I need to refactor something I just change the value in the symbol table.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 18:37

>>66
I program in flow charts using symbols, so if I need to refactor something I just change the value in the symbol table.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 18:50

>>66
Any sufficiently clever DSL macro hack is indistinguishable from FIOC.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 18:54

I wuv TextMate. It looks like the shit, it is easily extendable, It works for all the languages I throw at it, (Python, Perl, C, C++) it works very well with git, and I can start and aim it from Terminal, which is unusual for OS X GUI IDEs.

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-03 3:52

Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List