4 ms·

But there will never be an IDE like that. It's like saying that trucks are always better than cars, provided that the truck uses less gas, fits better into smal

by Drakim 14y ago

But there will never be an IDE like that. It's like saying that trucks are always better than cars, provided that the truck uses less gas, fits better into small spaces, and is easier to control. Text editors win over IDEs because outside of theory you never get an IDE like that, they are always slower, always full of clutter. I've seen some people promote certain lightweight IDEs as being just as handy as text editors, but it's simply not true. Their startup time is simply measured in several seconds seconds rather than several minutes, but it's never instant like my text editor. They have a minimalistic interface, but it's usually a lot of stuff crammed into very small menus, nothing like the text editors where I can intuitively find everything (because the text editor doesn't overreach in functionality, it's just a text editor).

coldtea 14y ago
>But there will never be an IDE like that. Nothing at all technically or theoretically prevents it. >t's like saying that trucks are always better than cars, provided that the truck uses less gas, fits better into small spaces, and is easier to control. Except those contrains only apply to physical objects such as cars. With code, you can achieve all of the requirements I described. Not because there are no compromises to be made when programming -- but because none of those compromises comes into play in this situation. You CAN have an IDE that opens fast. You CAN have an IDE with a great editor pane (embedded Vim for example). None of those are infeasible or necessary tradeoffs. >I've seen some people promote certain lightweight IDEs as being just as handy as text editors, but it's simply not true. Their startup time is simply measured in several seconds seconds rather than several minutes, but it's never instant like my text editor. They have a minimalistic interface, but it's usually a lot of stuff crammed into very small menus, nothing like the text editors where I can intuitively find everything (because the text editor doesn't overreach in functionality, it's just a text editor). None of those are necessary characteristics of an IDE. The fact that you say "usually" admits to that. As an example: something like Sublime Text 3 can load in split seconds. The basic things it lacks to be a full IDE (refactoring support, embedded debugger, etc) are things that can be loaded on demand, so if they were added to it, startup time wouldn't be affected at all. And it could still have a minimalistic interface even with those. Why? Because, for one, nothing necessitates all panes being open at all times. E.g When you run the debugger you can see the debugger toolbar -- when editing, you don't. Etc. As for your "Their startup time is simply measured in several seconds seconds rather than several minutes, but it's never instant like my text editor". 1) As I said, something like ST3 opens instantly. 2) Even if it takes seconds, who cares? You open your editor once and you work. It's not like you reopen it all the time. If you do open it, e.g because you want an editor for sysadmin, terminal work, sure, use something else.

by Drakim 14y ago

coldtea 14y ago

>But there will never be an IDE like that. Nothing at all technically or theoretically prevents it. >t's like saying that trucks are always better than cars, provided that the truck uses less gas, fits better into small spaces, and is easier to control. Except those contrains only apply to physical objects such as cars. With code, you can achieve all of the requirements I described. Not because there are no compromises to be made when programming -- but because none of those compromises comes into play in this situation. You CAN have an IDE that opens fast. You CAN have an IDE with a great editor pane (embedded Vim for example). None of those are infeasible or necessary tradeoffs. >I've seen some people promote certain lightweight IDEs as being just as handy as text editors, but it's simply not true. Their startup time is simply measured in several seconds seconds rather than several minutes, but it's never instant like my text editor. They have a minimalistic interface, but it's usually a lot of stuff crammed into very small menus, nothing like the text editors where I can intuitively find everything (because the text editor doesn't overreach in functionality, it's just a text editor). None of those are necessary characteristics of an IDE. The fact that you say "usually" admits to that. As an example: something like Sublime Text 3 can load in split seconds. The basic things it lacks to be a full IDE (refactoring support, embedded debugger, etc) are things that can be loaded on demand, so if they were added to it, startup time wouldn't be affected at all. And it could still have a minimalistic interface even with those. Why? Because, for one, nothing necessitates all panes being open at all times. E.g When you run the debugger you can see the debugger toolbar -- when editing, you don't. Etc. As for your "Their startup time is simply measured in several seconds seconds rather than several minutes, but it's never instant like my text editor". 1) As I said, something like ST3 opens instantly. 2) Even if it takes seconds, who cares? You open your editor once and you work. It's not like you reopen it all the time. If you do open it, e.g because you want an editor for sysadmin, terminal work, sure, use something else.