3 ms·
I have to disagree with "powerful IDEs do the work much better". It's just not true. Neovim with a few plugins (less than 10 is certainly enough) can definitely
by aliceryhl 5y ago
I have to disagree with "powerful IDEs do the work much better". It's just not true. Neovim with a few plugins (less than 10 is certainly enough) can definitely compete with IDEs.
- sa46 5y agoI've used emacs for about 10 years (written plugins, declared emacs.d bankruptcy, gone all-in on org-mode), so I'm familiar with the pros of configurable editors. Here's a list of more advanced functionality built into Intellij that would be difficult to replicate: - Bullet-proof navigation and advanced refactoring that works every time across a wide variety of languages. - Database integration: syntax highlighting for SQL code in strings, runnable sql, database introspection - Debugging: consistency and polish across languages, not relying on external tools that might not be installed, visual debugger Text-editors struggle with the "integrated" aspect of an IDE. It's not terribly difficult to coerce text editors to perform well for a single language. It's much harder to integrate plugins and provide a consistent experience. There's good reasons to use text editors (learn how it all works, extreme customization, magit, lightweight) but there's many development tasks Intellij is just better at.
- aliceryhl 5y agoI mean, it's a trade-off. IntelliJ is better at some things, and worse at others. There are certain programming languages where I prefer IntelliJ (mainly Java and PHP), and there are other cases where I prefer Neovim (Rust, Julia, Python, LaTeX, markdown). > Text-editors struggle with the "integrated" aspect of an IDE. Neovim integrates a lot better with my terminal heavy workflows than IntelliJ does.