3 ms·
Don't get too excited about these sophomoric features. All modern IDEs have copied the best features from various editors. You can get the kill ring and set m
by codex 13y ago
Don't get too excited about these sophomoric features. All modern IDEs have copied the best features from various editors. You can get the kill ring and set mark in IntelliJ, for example, and various other things besides.
These features are all simple hacks from twenty years ago. What's really difficult is putting in the elbow grease to polish the environment to a shine of high productivity, which is where buying a commercial IDE is a win. Code completion works better. Refactoring works better. Fuzzy completion works better. The keyboard shortcuts won't put you in the hospital. But mainly, code browsing in large, complex code bases works better.
It's really hard for people to look around and realize that times have changed, and change with them. People learn one thing and then their ways are set. It's up to the next generation to move things forward.
- mtdewcmu 13y agoA lot of programmers would like to keep it simple and fast. IDEs tend to be slow, and crash, and have extremely cluttered UIs. All the "polish" that went into designing the environment means that you can't change what you don't like about it.
- qu4z-2 13y agoAs someone who's gone the other way (from an IDE to a shall we say "separated" development environment), I can tell you you're wrong. For me, at least. I've seen people impressively efficient in commercial IDEs, but the best coders I know all use a collection of simple, reliable, and predictable tools. EDIT: And this idea that having a superset of checked feature-boxes is superiority is at the root of the problem.
- mheathr 13y agoEmacs:Display Editor::Java:Program Execution