3 ms·

For me, using an IDE would be “crippling my productivity”. Instead of just starting to code, I'd have to wait a few minutes for the IDE to open, and click throu

by xigoi 3y ago

For me, using an IDE would be “crippling my productivity”. Instead of just starting to code, I'd have to wait a few minutes for the IDE to open, and click through a billion GUI windows, just to be able to see my code in a tiny window surrounded by dozens of useless toolbars. And whenever I try to do anything with the code, it will take a second to process my keystroke and then several windows will pop up, obscuring half of the tiny part of the screen that actually contains code. And as a bonus, I'd have to pay more money for this than my dormitory costs? No thanks, I'll stick with Neovim.

RyEgswuCsn 3y ago
Getting better equipment (larger screens, faster computers, licences) would solve most of your concerns with the IDEs. And getting better equipment usually soon becomes a non-problem for professional programmers. Having an IDE is like hiring a side-kick --- if the side-kick is component enough and you can afford them, why wouldn't you hire one?
- xigoi 3y ago
  Not everyone who codes is a professional programmer. > if the side-kick is component enough and you can afford them, why wouldn't you hire one? Because it doesn't provide anything actually useful for me. Also, I don't want to use proprietary software for moral reasons.
  - RyEgswuCsn 3y ago
    Then the problem isn't IDEs cripple productivity, it is simply that one may not be operating at a scale that benefit from using them. There are many decent open source IDEs (e.g. NetBeans and Eclipse for Java).
    - jottinger 3y ago
      ... and IDEA community edition is also free. There's no reason to not choose any of the major IDEs on the basis of cost. You can get free and quite workable editions of all of them, and they're open source as well, so the "moral quandary" is avoidable unless it's artificial.
  - jottinger 3y ago
    What's your definition of "proprietary?" All of the major IDEs are open-source in their free editions. I mean, more seriously, I get it: you have a bee in your bonnet and you will find any reason possible to avoid it. VIM 4EVA and all that, raise your fist and yell. But I wouldn't even bother with Java as any serious endeavor if I were you; a lot of employers will ask your preference of IDE just to get a sense of who you are as a programmer, and will hide their giggles when you say "I use emacs/vim/notepad++ like a BAWSSSS!" and move on to the next candidate who'll get the performance magnifier of a common and free tool.
    - xigoi 3y ago
      > “I use emacs/vim/notepad++ like a BAWSSSS!” What a strawman. I don't use Neovim with the intent of looking cool or something, but because it makes me highly productive, gives me complete control over my editing experience and I can use it anywhere, not just on powerful desktop computers with a large screen.
jottinger 3y ago
You actually wouldn't. You might once - but then you're counting "installing the IDE" as "using the IDE every time" and that just doesn't happen. You're also using a LOT of hyperbole, to the point where you're just plain wrong. A few minutes for the IDE to open? Nah, bruh. Couple of seconds, and since you leave the IDE open for a while, that startup time gets to be ignored. You aren't starting the IDE, exiting the IDE, running your code, starting your IDE, exiting the IDE, running your code. You're starting the IDE, writing, running, debugging, reaching some kind of finishing point, THEN shutting down the IDE... maybe. A lot of programmers have their IDEs open 24/7. Over a month's runtime, those three seconds opening the IDE seem (and are) irrelevant. Billion GUI windows? Nah, bruh. Even IDEA, which has a lot of windows on initial installation, has only a few... and they're all for a point, if you, like, read them. A second to process your keystroke? Also nonsense. Even a raspi can process faster than that. Unless you're deliberately overloading your machine, I suppose. That's always an option... but a counter to that is "... don't?" And useless toolbars? Useless to whom? The IDEs you'll find in Java are battle-tested. The useless toolbars are hidden these days. You might not know what they're useful for, but that's not the same as being useless. If you write Java, you'll learn how useful they are. And as a bonus, you'd ... did you say.. have to pay more money than your dorm costs? ... why? Java has three major IDEs: IDEA, Eclipse, and Netbeans. (If you want to exclude netbeans, join the crowd. Everyone else excludes it, too.) All three have free editions that cost you ... like... literally... nothing. Zip. Nada. Zilch. Try again.
- mi_lk 3y ago
  Lol, the parent is not serious. People who love to hate Java please take a look at the status quo and stop regurgitating outdated arguments. You can take vim out of my cold dead hands but there’s no way one will be less productive in Java with modern IDEs unless they willingly choose to
  - jottinger 3y ago
    I get that. Poe's Law applies.

by xigoi 3y ago

RyEgswuCsn 3y ago

Getting better equipment (larger screens, faster computers, licences) would solve most of your concerns with the IDEs. And getting better equipment usually soon becomes a non-problem for professional programmers. Having an IDE is like hiring a side-kick --- if the side-kick is component enough and you can afford them, why wouldn't you hire one?

xigoi 3y ago
Not everyone who codes is a professional programmer. > if the side-kick is component enough and you can afford them, why wouldn't you hire one? Because it doesn't provide anything actually useful for me. Also, I don't want to use proprietary software for moral reasons.
- RyEgswuCsn 3y ago
  Then the problem isn't IDEs cripple productivity, it is simply that one may not be operating at a scale that benefit from using them. There are many decent open source IDEs (e.g. NetBeans and Eclipse for Java).
  - jottinger 3y ago
    ... and IDEA community edition is also free. There's no reason to not choose any of the major IDEs on the basis of cost. You can get free and quite workable editions of all of them, and they're open source as well, so the "moral quandary" is avoidable unless it's artificial.
- jottinger 3y ago
  What's your definition of "proprietary?" All of the major IDEs are open-source in their free editions. I mean, more seriously, I get it: you have a bee in your bonnet and you will find any reason possible to avoid it. VIM 4EVA and all that, raise your fist and yell. But I wouldn't even bother with Java as any serious endeavor if I were you; a lot of employers will ask your preference of IDE just to get a sense of who you are as a programmer, and will hide their giggles when you say "I use emacs/vim/notepad++ like a BAWSSSS!" and move on to the next candidate who'll get the performance magnifier of a common and free tool.
  - xigoi 3y ago
    > “I use emacs/vim/notepad++ like a BAWSSSS!” What a strawman. I don't use Neovim with the intent of looking cool or something, but because it makes me highly productive, gives me complete control over my editing experience and I can use it anywhere, not just on powerful desktop computers with a large screen.

jottinger 3y ago

You actually wouldn't. You might once - but then you're counting "installing the IDE" as "using the IDE every time" and that just doesn't happen. You're also using a LOT of hyperbole, to the point where you're just plain wrong. A few minutes for the IDE to open? Nah, bruh. Couple of seconds, and since you leave the IDE open for a while, that startup time gets to be ignored. You aren't starting the IDE, exiting the IDE, running your code, starting your IDE, exiting the IDE, running your code. You're starting the IDE, writing, running, debugging, reaching some kind of finishing point, THEN shutting down the IDE... maybe. A lot of programmers have their IDEs open 24/7. Over a month's runtime, those three seconds opening the IDE seem (and are) irrelevant. Billion GUI windows? Nah, bruh. Even IDEA, which has a lot of windows on initial installation, has only a few... and they're all for a point, if you, like, read them. A second to process your keystroke? Also nonsense. Even a raspi can process faster than that. Unless you're deliberately overloading your machine, I suppose. That's always an option... but a counter to that is "... don't?" And useless toolbars? Useless to whom? The IDEs you'll find in Java are battle-tested. The useless toolbars are hidden these days. You might not know what they're useful for, but that's not the same as being useless. If you write Java, you'll learn how useful they are. And as a bonus, you'd ... did you say.. have to pay more money than your dorm costs? ... why? Java has three major IDEs: IDEA, Eclipse, and Netbeans. (If you want to exclude netbeans, join the crowd. Everyone else excludes it, too.) All three have free editions that cost you ... like... literally... nothing. Zip. Nada. Zilch. Try again.

mi_lk 3y ago
Lol, the parent is not serious. People who love to hate Java please take a look at the status quo and stop regurgitating outdated arguments. You can take vim out of my cold dead hands but there’s no way one will be less productive in Java with modern IDEs unless they willingly choose to
- jottinger 3y ago
  I get that. Poe's Law applies.