4 ms·

> When I meet a young chap extolling the benefits of Vim or Emacs or really anything that doesn't have stepped debugging and code competition...well, there are

> When I meet a young chap extolling the benefits of Vim or Emacs or really anything that doesn't have stepped debugging and code competition...well, there are no bonus points for doing things the hard way. Why do you think they are doing things "the hard way"? Emacs can have all the things you have described. And it can do that for languages that are not part of the .NET Framework, they just have to have a language server implementation. The problem with "IDEs" was placing all your eggs into a single basket. You are on Visual Studio and then you need to do some Java(or Scala, or whatever). And now you have to get another IDE. Some tried to be one IDE to rule them all (Eclipse, Netbeans), didn't work all that well. You need a good editor - most IDEs don't have one. You need integration with your language of choice. You need compilers and linters and a bunch of other things. Better to glue components that do one thing and do it well, than having one IDE trying to do everything. And those components can fell just as integrated.

MrJohz 4y ago
IntelliJ and VSCode have both worked pretty well with anything I've thrown at them, I'd consider them both fairly successful as IDEs "to rule them all". Obviously they're both very different ends of the IDE spectrum, but they've both had intellisense, debugging, type revealing, and refactoring features for all the mainstream languages I've tried with them. VSCode particularly tends to integrate well with LSPs.
closeparen 4y ago
>Why do you think they are doing things "the hard way"? Emacs can have all the things you have described In the first few years of my career I would try every few months to get these things actually installed and working in emacs. It was definitely the hard way. >The problem with "IDEs" was placing all your eggs into a single basket Eclipse is a uniquely terrible piece of software and I understand why it might polarize people against IDEs for life. The JetBrains products are pretty good and, importantly, modular and consistent enough across languages that I don't mind.
- aidos 4y ago
  I believe they’re talking about a different “hard way” in that they’re suggesting you can’t have those features in vim / eMacs etc and have to do something else instead. You’re not wrong, configuring these editors is 100% the hard way (that doesn’t stop me from doing it though).
throwaway2037 4y ago
You wrote: <<You need a good editor - most IDEs don't have one.>> Can you name any?

MrJohz 4y ago

IntelliJ and VSCode have both worked pretty well with anything I've thrown at them, I'd consider them both fairly successful as IDEs "to rule them all". Obviously they're both very different ends of the IDE spectrum, but they've both had intellisense, debugging, type revealing, and refactoring features for all the mainstream languages I've tried with them. VSCode particularly tends to integrate well with LSPs.

closeparen 4y ago

>Why do you think they are doing things "the hard way"? Emacs can have all the things you have described In the first few years of my career I would try every few months to get these things actually installed and working in emacs. It was definitely the hard way. >The problem with "IDEs" was placing all your eggs into a single basket Eclipse is a uniquely terrible piece of software and I understand why it might polarize people against IDEs for life. The JetBrains products are pretty good and, importantly, modular and consistent enough across languages that I don't mind.

aidos 4y ago
I believe they’re talking about a different “hard way” in that they’re suggesting you can’t have those features in vim / eMacs etc and have to do something else instead. You’re not wrong, configuring these editors is 100% the hard way (that doesn’t stop me from doing it though).

throwaway2037 4y ago

You wrote: <<You need a good editor - most IDEs don't have one.>> Can you name any?