4 ms·

This a total tangent but I always thought it might be interesting if an IDE pulled data from source control (and presented it inline somehow). How "hot" a func

This a total tangent but I always thought it might be interesting if an IDE pulled data from source control (and presented it inline somehow). How "hot" a function is - has it reiceved a lot of edits in the recent past? Or is cold and old (and therefore you'd imagine reasonably bug-free for most use cases). I think the number of unqiue people editing a portion of code would also be interesting to know. As you might expect multiple authors to have different beliefs about the point of the code and therefore the code is probably going to be more muddy and less clear.

revelation 10y ago
Visual Studio does this: https://i-msdn.sec.s-msft.com/dynimg/IC805614.jpeg https://i-msdn.sec.s-msft.com/dynimg/IC805614.jpeg (For C# at least)
- jobigoud 10y ago
  Is it for Team Foundation only or can other VCS be integrated into this?
  - sandyarmstrong 10y ago
    It works with git out of the box.
- danschuller 10y ago
  Awesome. I even use Visual Studio and C# but didn't know about this!
- netcraft 10y ago
  wow thats awesome - hey intellij...
logicallee 10y ago
Forget IDE, an interpreter could be interactive, i.e. a language itself could require an online connection to a service, let you type things that are ambiguous, take a guess (or ask you) and then record your intent interactively, while sending back to the server what you ended up meaning. Then you could finally type something like "double k" and have it make sure you meant set k equal to k times two. (yes, of course.) but maybe one guy means append k to k as a string, that one guy in a hundred can pick that. Today, thousands of people a day go through Google as part of this process. Why should Google be part of my actual workflow experience, without being part of the IDE experience or, well, language - or using people's feedback in any way? It doesn't make sense.
- asimuvPR 10y ago
  So like Kite but built into the language?
  - logicallee 10y ago
    I guess a bit more like wolfram alpha's disambiguation (though that's not interactive) or Google's suggestions (did you mean...) but more of a dialog than "take it or leave it this is my suggestion". On kite... So I'm not familiar with kite but yes, "the language" should be much broader, way too broad to include in a static download. Take my example: every English-speaking programmer knows what it means to double something but no programming language I know includes a function called double() which means to set equal to itself * 2 (because including such a thing in a downloadable language is a stupid idea to do). On the other hand it's not a stupid idea to do so interactively in a connected "language as a service", having it offer and keep track of the fact that people usually end up wanting you to set it to the value * 2 (90% of the time). You can test that this would work. Write some pseudo code to accomplish something. Next, Google each line you've written, along with the name of a language. See? It works. You can change the pseudocode to code in a language interactively. For choices the programmer has to make, the environment could ask them then and there. This only works when a language is "live" or online, and keeps track of what people end up meaning. Maybe I shouldn't call it "language" but something else... Yet at the end of the day if you're writing code, answering some questions and moving on, it's close to a language, isn't it?
- herdrick 10y ago
  Yes, I think something like this is the future of programming. It goes even further than what you're suggesting. The codebase will no longer need to be unambiguous, among other things.
dorfsmay 10y ago
So something like this: http://google-engtools.blogspot.ca/2011/12/bug-prediction-at-google.html?m=1 http://google-engtools.blogspot.ca/2011/12/bug-prediction-at...
forgotpwtomain 10y ago
You have to weigh the ease-of-access vs. IDE clutter though. For example I see people using linters that update automatically as you type (I think on Atom there isn't even an option to disable this if the packages are enabled) - which is frankly quite awful, when I'm writing the code I care a lot more about my thought process than being distracted by style complaints, there is a limited amount of context you can keep in mind at once, and subsidiary things shouldn't be actively wasting your time. At least for me git log -L<start>,<end>:<file> is usually preferable. That said it shouldn't be a hard tool to build for yourself if this is what you need.
- wtetzner 10y ago
  Yeah, you should definitely be able to turn it on and off with a keyboard shortcut.
MasterScrat 10y ago
Another interesting overlay would be how much time is spent in production running each specific line.
mrfusion 10y ago
This I would be so great! I've thought of that too.

revelation 10y ago

Visual Studio does this: https://i-msdn.sec.s-msft.com/dynimg/IC805614.jpeg https://i-msdn.sec.s-msft.com/dynimg/IC805614.jpeg (For C# at least)

jobigoud 10y ago
Is it for Team Foundation only or can other VCS be integrated into this?
- sandyarmstrong 10y ago
  It works with git out of the box.
danschuller 10y ago
Awesome. I even use Visual Studio and C# but didn't know about this!
netcraft 10y ago
wow thats awesome - hey intellij...

logicallee 10y ago

Forget IDE, an interpreter could be interactive, i.e. a language itself could require an online connection to a service, let you type things that are ambiguous, take a guess (or ask you) and then record your intent interactively, while sending back to the server what you ended up meaning. Then you could finally type something like "double k" and have it make sure you meant set k equal to k times two. (yes, of course.) but maybe one guy means append k to k as a string, that one guy in a hundred can pick that. Today, thousands of people a day go through Google as part of this process. Why should Google be part of my actual workflow experience, without being part of the IDE experience or, well, language - or using people's feedback in any way? It doesn't make sense.

asimuvPR 10y ago
So like Kite but built into the language?
- logicallee 10y ago
  I guess a bit more like wolfram alpha's disambiguation (though that's not interactive) or Google's suggestions (did you mean...) but more of a dialog than "take it or leave it this is my suggestion". On kite... So I'm not familiar with kite but yes, "the language" should be much broader, way too broad to include in a static download. Take my example: every English-speaking programmer knows what it means to double something but no programming language I know includes a function called double() which means to set equal to itself * 2 (because including such a thing in a downloadable language is a stupid idea to do). On the other hand it's not a stupid idea to do so interactively in a connected "language as a service", having it offer and keep track of the fact that people usually end up wanting you to set it to the value * 2 (90% of the time). You can test that this would work. Write some pseudo code to accomplish something. Next, Google each line you've written, along with the name of a language. See? It works. You can change the pseudocode to code in a language interactively. For choices the programmer has to make, the environment could ask them then and there. This only works when a language is "live" or online, and keeps track of what people end up meaning. Maybe I shouldn't call it "language" but something else... Yet at the end of the day if you're writing code, answering some questions and moving on, it's close to a language, isn't it?
herdrick 10y ago
Yes, I think something like this is the future of programming. It goes even further than what you're suggesting. The codebase will no longer need to be unambiguous, among other things.

dorfsmay 10y ago

So something like this: http://google-engtools.blogspot.ca/2011/12/bug-prediction-at-google.html?m=1 http://google-engtools.blogspot.ca/2011/12/bug-prediction-at...

forgotpwtomain 10y ago

You have to weigh the ease-of-access vs. IDE clutter though. For example I see people using linters that update automatically as you type (I think on Atom there isn't even an option to disable this if the packages are enabled) - which is frankly quite awful, when I'm writing the code I care a lot more about my thought process than being distracted by style complaints, there is a limited amount of context you can keep in mind at once, and subsidiary things shouldn't be actively wasting your time. At least for me git log -L<start>,<end>:<file> is usually preferable. That said it shouldn't be a hard tool to build for yourself if this is what you need.

wtetzner 10y ago
Yeah, you should definitely be able to turn it on and off with a keyboard shortcut.

MasterScrat 10y ago

Another interesting overlay would be how much time is spent in production running each specific line.

mrfusion 10y ago

This I would be so great! I've thought of that too.