3 ms·
Not GP, but I have a linter that runs on commit, and generally it doesn’t catch anything because I’ve learned not to make the mistakes. I have never liked auto
by _-___________-_ 6y ago
Not GP, but I have a linter that runs on commit, and generally it doesn’t catch anything because I’ve learned not to make the mistakes.
I have never liked autocomplete. If I know the type or method I’m looking for (which is most of the time) then typing its name is not a hardship, and takes really no more time than finding it in a list.
If I don’t know the type/method, most of the time I have the documentation up in another window or monitor, and I’m going to want to read that in depth anyway, since I’m not familiar with the type/method, so autocomplete wouldn’t save me any meaningful time.
- tomsmeding 6y agoI agree with you, but this depends on the language. Some languages and libraries take more liberties with the length of identifiers, the amount of abstraction layers, and maybe more. Java is the classic example where using a plain text editor is really a liability; I can use C++ without any editor support and be fast. But I'm not sure what this really depends on. (Disclaimer: my argument is flawed because I know C++ well and not Java.)
- _-___________-_ 6y agoThere may definitely be something in that. I’m writing Rust or C most of the time.
- chriszhang 6y agoDespite your disclaimer I think you are onto something. I am experienced in both Java and C++ and while I can read/write/refactor code in C++ just fine with Vim, doing so in Java without a sophisticated IDE is a painful experience.