3 ms·

I've never used any of those new editors (ST, Atom, VS Code, ...). Can anyone compare them to the more classic ultraedit? Or said differently: Why would I chose

by cleeus 10y ago

I've never used any of those new editors (ST, Atom, VS Code, ...). Can anyone compare them to the more classic ultraedit? Or said differently: Why would I chose ST3 over one of the classic editors?

mevile 10y ago
Atom and VS Code use the same basic underlying technology and are JavaScript under the hood. With both you can actually open up a chrome like web inspector to help you write and debug plugins. These editors are Open Source and funded by companies whose main source of income is not the editor, but have money (GitHub and Microsoft). Sublime Text is an editor that brought a lot of new ideas that many editors now adopt (multiple cursors, minimap). It's written in native platform code + python 3. It is closed source and written by a small group of people. Their company only sells Sublime Text. Personally I prefer intellij. I do use VS Code for text/non project editing but out of ST, VS Code and Atom I think ST is the better editor, it's future is just isn't certain but it's widely used and has a great eco system.
- FezVrasta 10y ago
  Actually multi cursor has been available in Gedit for several years... I really doubt that Sublime Text invented it.
  - mevile 10y ago
    I've used gedit, but I'm not familiar with multi-cursor implementation in it. I suppose I've always seen the multi-cursor implementation in Sublime Text as top-notch with other editors struggling to implement anything like it. Intellij finally has pretty decent multi-cursor support but it's still a little bit behind ST's. For example, in IntelliJ the ease of applying multiple cursors seems to involve more work than in ST. In VS Code multiple cursors isn't nearly well implemented as ST or even IntelliJ.
- KennyCason 10y ago
  intellij++
LionessLover 10y ago
If it was just the editing I could use any coding editor and be fine. The reason I ended up paying the subscription for WebStorm (after also trying out Atom) was a) The inspections b) The type support. To explain b), I annotate my JS code with and JSDoc and Closure inline-comment type annotations. WebStorm uses that to check if the types match - I get much of the TypeSript functionality for free without using TypeSript. I also used @typedef (JSDoc tag) heavily to define my own types. And auto-completion suggestions base don the types. I used to be okay without types, but after having a more complex project (note: large !== complex, simple UI stuff that I had done previously was a much larger code base and I never felt I needed the help of "static types") I found it was good to use them. Why not Atom: It looked great and probably is a great editor, but it didn't give me even close to the functionality of WebStorm. Also, when I had a problem the only response I got was "we are waiting for your pull request", meaning "fix it yourself". Why I understand that unpaid people are not eager fixing my problems I have enough of work without having to contribute to each of the products I'm using - so I prefer paying the people at JetBrains to take my bug reports and fix them (which they do - and I've filed a lot of reports before the "2016" release, so much that they gave me two years worth of subscription for free for being a good beta-tester). Another advantage of the IntelliJ products is that it's basically the same IDE-platform for all kinds of languages. I'm learning Scala now (the Coursera course on Scala by Scala's author is back!) - another IntelliJ IDE (and that one even is free, the free Java IDE plus Scala plugin), for example.

by cleeus 10y ago

I've never used any of those new editors (ST, Atom, VS Code, ...). Can anyone compare them to the more classic ultraedit? Or said differently: Why would I chose ST3 over one of the classic editors?

mevile 10y ago

Atom and VS Code use the same basic underlying technology and are JavaScript under the hood. With both you can actually open up a chrome like web inspector to help you write and debug plugins. These editors are Open Source and funded by companies whose main source of income is not the editor, but have money (GitHub and Microsoft). Sublime Text is an editor that brought a lot of new ideas that many editors now adopt (multiple cursors, minimap). It's written in native platform code + python 3. It is closed source and written by a small group of people. Their company only sells Sublime Text. Personally I prefer intellij. I do use VS Code for text/non project editing but out of ST, VS Code and Atom I think ST is the better editor, it's future is just isn't certain but it's widely used and has a great eco system.

FezVrasta 10y ago
Actually multi cursor has been available in Gedit for several years... I really doubt that Sublime Text invented it.
- mevile 10y ago
  I've used gedit, but I'm not familiar with multi-cursor implementation in it. I suppose I've always seen the multi-cursor implementation in Sublime Text as top-notch with other editors struggling to implement anything like it. Intellij finally has pretty decent multi-cursor support but it's still a little bit behind ST's. For example, in IntelliJ the ease of applying multiple cursors seems to involve more work than in ST. In VS Code multiple cursors isn't nearly well implemented as ST or even IntelliJ.
KennyCason 10y ago
intellij++

LionessLover 10y ago

If it was just the editing I could use any coding editor and be fine. The reason I ended up paying the subscription for WebStorm (after also trying out Atom) was a) The inspections b) The type support. To explain b), I annotate my JS code with and JSDoc and Closure inline-comment type annotations. WebStorm uses that to check if the types match - I get much of the TypeSript functionality for free without using TypeSript. I also used @typedef (JSDoc tag) heavily to define my own types. And auto-completion suggestions base don the types. I used to be okay without types, but after having a more complex project (note: large !== complex, simple UI stuff that I had done previously was a much larger code base and I never felt I needed the help of "static types") I found it was good to use them. Why not Atom: It looked great and probably is a great editor, but it didn't give me even close to the functionality of WebStorm. Also, when I had a problem the only response I got was "we are waiting for your pull request", meaning "fix it yourself". Why I understand that unpaid people are not eager fixing my problems I have enough of work without having to contribute to each of the products I'm using - so I prefer paying the people at JetBrains to take my bug reports and fix them (which they do - and I've filed a lot of reports before the "2016" release, so much that they gave me two years worth of subscription for free for being a good beta-tester). Another advantage of the IntelliJ products is that it's basically the same IDE-platform for all kinds of languages. I'm learning Scala now (the Coursera course on Scala by Scala's author is back!) - another IntelliJ IDE (and that one even is free, the free Java IDE plus Scala plugin), for example.