/prog/ - Editors — World4ch

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 12:26

Anyone here use Emacs or vi? What about an IDE?

Defend yourselves, now.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 12:42

I use Code::Blocks.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 12:47

Blode::Cocks

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 12:59

>>3

"..."
Go back to /b/ whence thy came!
(whence == from where)

*banish*

Name: >>3 2011-01-02 13:19

1. Complete lack of BBCODE.
2. Complete lack of sage.
3. Tells someone to go back to /b/.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 13:28

I don't use an "IDE", "faggot"

Name: emacs 2011-01-02 13:37

emacs

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 14:28

I use rational rhapsody to edit my code at work.
Life can't be worse.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 14:34

ED! ED! ED IS THE STANDARD!

alternatively, emacs.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 14:52

1. Emacs is the only real choice for programming.
2. Ed is the standard for all other tasks.
3. Vi is a bad version of ed for morons who can't remember what they're working on.
4. Vim is vi wishing it were Emacs.
5. IDEs are hardly ``integrated''. They're like a gated community in the middle of nowhere.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 15:06

>>10 LISTEN TO THIS MAN >>10

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 15:23

ITT: Emacs faggots.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 17:07

>>12
ITT: Emacs, faggots. Because it's a programming board, and Emacs is for programming.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 17:15

textMate and starbucks.

"but starbucks isn't a text editor."

why not? its very important for my work, it helps me concentrate... it's a tool, and it's always there when im coding. in that sense, its a text editor just like vi or eclipse.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 17:19

Notepad when I'm using windows, Gedit on Linux. If I'm on the console or ssh, I usually can slog through with vi or vim. I just discovered nano, though, and it is much nicer.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 17:29

>>14
You are a tool.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 17:38

geany

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 17:47

Xcode or code::blocks
Sorry but IDE's are superior, stop living in the past

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 18:17

>>18
Stop living in a world where pluralising with an apostrophe is acceptable. Shit IHBT.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 18:42

Gedit, Notepad++, Eclipse and (God help me) Microsoft Visual Studio++

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 18:58

Student here, I just use emacs, although I use Eclipse with Java. The reason is that everything else I have to do in Java is made to be used with Eclipse, so it's a lot less pain using Eclipse.

Off course, they never tell you to use Eclipse, so all of the newbies start of on drJava, which is shit. To the point where they don't even think enough to make the text look nice. It's a text editor, where you look at text all day. Make it look nice, ffs.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 19:05

Vim supremacy

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 19:21

I use gedit for text editing even though it is not a ``true'' editor like vim/emacs/ed. However, I try to be productive rather than look like a skiddie CLI-using faggot, so it doesn't bother me.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 22:52

The freshness and novelty of editor wars never cease to amaze me. Another high point in /prog/ history.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 22:53

TextEdit. But that's on NeXTSTEP BITCHES!

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 0:03

>>25
for NeXTSTEP 8.2 or newer, I prefer TextMate.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 8:41

>>23
using emacs in a CLI
the horror

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 9:26

jesus christ /prog/ its not the 90's anymore where we have to display 3 code windows on a 800x600 screen

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 9:35

>>28
When I code I don't want extra MEGABYTES of clicky IDEs, auto-complete, syntax highlight and cursor positioning code. I just want an EDitor.
Not a "Microsoft Visual Studio C++ Express Professional Edition 2010". Not a "viitor".

ED! ED! ED IS THE STANDARD!

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 10:40

>>29
Why? I know a lot of IDEs have lots of jingles and bells you'll never need, but if you have a lot of code clicking between the pieces is way faster... Just don't use the features you don't need...
or just enlight me, since I have worked with IDEs from the start

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 10:55

>>30
Just don't use the features you don't need
Think of the bloat! Think of the children!

Editors are much more lightweight and powerful than those bloated monsters. The ^GNU/_Bloat's ed(1) is 40kb, VC++ is... 30mb? 200mb? Even emacs is lighter than that, and much more powerful/useful.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 10:55

>>28
Well I have to display two code windows on a 1280x800 screen!! _WHAT^NOW_BEST~~BUY¿~~

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 13:34

VIM with some C/C++ programming geared plugins

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 13:39

>>21
Scandinavian detected

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 13:48

>>30
You heard the man, just do yourself a favour and use ed.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 14:33

Depends on language:
c++ => M$ VC++ EE or QtCreator ( Love autocomplete in last one. )
c# => M$ VC# EE
Java => NetBeans
Any other language:
When on Linux: MCEdit/gedit
When on Windows: Notepad++

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 14:35

>>36
c++ => M$ VC++ EE
c# => M$ VC# EE

When I distractedly saw these two lines, I thought they where Perl code, seriously.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 14:37

>>37
Sorry for giving you wrong impressions.

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 15:54

I use Bonzi Buddy

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 16:38

>>39
Did you mean: Bonsai Buddy

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 17:08

I use Emacs for everything.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1sXuHnf_lo

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 17:30

>>41
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1sXuHnf_lo
macbook

He's a fag for other reasons, I'd just convert it to handle onaholes

Editors

1 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 12:26

2 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 12:42

3 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 12:47

4 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 12:59

5 Name: >>3 2011-01-02 13:19

6 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 13:28

7 Name: emacs 2011-01-02 13:37

8 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 14:28

9 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 14:34

10 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 14:52

11 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 15:06

12 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 15:23

13 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 17:07

14 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 17:15

15 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 17:19

16 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 17:29

17 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 17:38

18 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 17:47

19 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 18:17

20 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 18:42

21 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 18:58

22 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 19:05

23 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 19:21

24 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 22:52

25 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 22:53

26 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 0:03

27 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 8:41

28 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 9:26

29 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 9:35

30 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 10:40

31 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 10:55

32 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 10:55

33 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 13:34

34 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 13:39

35 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 13:48

36 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 14:33

37 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 14:35

38 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 14:37

39 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 15:54

40 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 16:38

41 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 17:08

42 Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 17:30

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 12:26

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 12:42

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 12:47

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 12:59

Name: >>3 2011-01-02 13:19

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 13:28

Name: emacs 2011-01-02 13:37

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 14:28

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 14:34

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 14:52

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 15:06

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 15:23

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 17:07

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 17:15

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 17:19

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 17:29

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 17:38

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 17:47

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 18:17

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 18:42

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 18:58

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 19:05

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 19:21

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 22:52

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-02 22:53

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 0:03

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 8:41

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 9:26

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 9:35

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 10:40

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 10:55

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 10:55

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 13:34

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 13:39

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 13:48

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 14:33

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 14:35

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 14:37

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 15:54

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 16:38

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 17:08

Name: Anonymous 2011-01-03 17:30